public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Crispin Cowan <crispin@wirex.com>
To: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>
Cc: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	linux-security-module@wirex.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Binary only module overview
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2001 15:50:11 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3BB25BA3.1060505@wirex.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E15lfKE-00047d-00@the-village.bc.nu> <3BB10E8E.10008@wirex.com> <20010925202417.A16558@kroah.com> <3BB229D1.10401@wirex.com> <20010926130156.B19819@kroah.com>

Greg KH wrote:

>On Wed, Sep 26, 2001 at 12:17:37PM -0700, Crispin Cowan wrote:
>
>>Greg KH wrote:
>>
>>>If you were to include a GPL licensed user space header file in a closed
>>>source program, of course you would be violating that license.
>>>
>>That is not clear to me. [... #include glibc -> #include kernel]
>>
>That is an issue to take up with the glibc authors, not me.
>
Fair enough. I pointed it out to make clear that there are licensing 
problems and ambiguities if one strictly insists that #include 
some_gpl.h implies that the code is GPL'd. If that is the case, then 
there are MUCH bigger licensing problems than LSM, so don't take it up 
with me, either :-)

>>If you (Greg, Alan) are confident that your interpretation of the GPL is 
>>correct, then just marking the files as GPL should be sufficient. What 
>>purpose is served by saying anything else?
>>
>As Alan stated, to reduce confusion as to the wishes of the copyright
>holders of the file.
>
However, it is an outright contradiction to some wishes of some other 
copyright holders of the kernel (Linus' binary kernel opinion). Since 
revisions to the kernel's GPL are explicitly prohibited, it seems to me 
that this statement of one side of the controversy as if it were a fact 
increases confusion rather than decreases it.

>a small note in it detailing this disagreement might be a nice thing to do.
>
Fair enough.  How about this:

    "This file is GPL. See the Linux Kernel's COPYING file for details.
    There is controversy over whether this permits you to write a module
    that #includes this file without placing your module under the GPL.
    Consult your lawyer for advice."

I'm really trying to be constructive here.  There is a real licensing 
problem over whether binary modules are legitimate at all, and the issue 
is not special to LSM. I'm trying to get LSM out of the way so that the 
advocates of either side can fight it out without smushing LSM in the 
middle :-)

Crispin

-- 
Crispin Cowan, Ph.D.
Chief Scientist, WireX Communications, Inc. http://wirex.com
Security Hardened Linux Distribution:       http://immunix.org
Available for purchase: http://wirex.com/Products/Immunix/purchase.html




  reply	other threads:[~2001-09-26 22:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 74+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2001-09-24 20:24 Binary only module overview Crispin Cowan
2001-09-24 23:39 ` Alan Cox
2001-09-25 23:09   ` Crispin Cowan
2001-09-25 23:15     ` jmjones
2001-09-26  3:24     ` Greg KH
2001-09-26 19:17       ` Crispin Cowan
2001-09-26 19:34         ` Alan Cox
2001-09-26 20:01         ` Greg KH
2001-09-26 22:50           ` Crispin Cowan [this message]
2001-09-26 23:14             ` Alan Cox
2001-09-27  0:22               ` Crispin Cowan
2001-09-27  2:19               ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2001-09-26 23:26             ` Greg KH
2001-09-26 20:38         ` Brian Hatch
2001-09-26 21:37         ` David Weinehall
2001-09-26 21:45           ` Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams
2001-09-26 21:58             ` Alan Cox
2001-09-26 22:09               ` Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams
2001-09-26 22:20                 ` Alan Cox
2001-09-26 23:03                   ` Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams
2001-09-26 23:46               ` Greg KH
2001-09-27 12:09                 ` Alan Cox
2001-09-27 16:49                   ` Greg KH
2001-09-28 22:50                     ` Alan Cox
2001-09-29  2:05                       ` jmjones
2001-09-29  3:37                         ` Rik van Riel
2001-09-29  3:57                           ` jmjones
2001-09-29 14:20                         ` Alan Cox
2001-09-26 22:12           ` Crispin Cowan
2001-09-26 16:36     ` Alan Cox
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-09-26 15:38 Giacomo Catenazzi
2001-09-26 13:08 KRAMER,STEVEN (HP-USA,ex1)
2001-09-25 22:38 Chad Hanson
2001-09-24 19:52 Petr Vandrovec
2001-09-24 18:03 ` Dave McCracken
2001-09-24 18:15   ` Eric W. Biederman
2001-09-24 16:40 Arjan van de Ven
2001-09-24 16:53 ` Rasmus Bøg Hansen
2001-09-24 16:58   ` Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams
2001-09-24 17:02   ` Andreas Steinmetz
2001-09-24 17:08   ` Anders Peter Fugmann
2001-09-24 17:24     ` Dave McCracken
2001-09-24 23:32   ` Alan Cox
2001-09-24 16:54 ` Alan Cox
2001-09-24 17:15 ` Kai Germaschewski
2001-09-24 17:16 ` Rick Haines
2001-09-24 17:17 ` Greg KH
2001-09-24 20:40   ` Casey Schaufler
2001-09-24 23:25     ` Alan Cox
2001-09-25 16:22       ` Casey Schaufler
2001-09-24 17:35 ` Steve Lord
2001-09-24 20:06 ` Michael Leun
2001-09-24 21:18 ` Nerijus Baliunas
2001-09-24 22:57 ` Brian Strand
2001-09-25 15:44 ` Greg KH
2001-09-25 19:09   ` Mark Zealey
2001-09-25 19:24     ` Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams
2001-09-25 20:42     ` Greg KH
2001-09-25 21:09       ` Roberto Nibali
2001-09-25 21:16         ` Greg KH
2001-09-25 22:14           ` Roberto Nibali
2001-09-25 22:15             ` Greg KH
2001-09-25 22:39               ` Roberto Nibali
2001-09-25 22:40       ` Greg KH
2001-09-26 16:38         ` Alan Cox
2001-09-25 16:43 ` Fabbione
2001-09-28  2:38   ` Edward S. Marshall
2001-09-25 23:24 ` Jes Sorensen
2001-09-28 14:09 ` Daniel Caujolle-Bert
2001-09-28 14:14   ` Arjan van de Ven
2001-09-28 14:42     ` Alan Cox
2001-09-28 14:52       ` Nicholas Knight
2001-09-29  9:04         ` Albert D. Cahalan
2001-09-28 19:44       ` Daniel Caujolle-Bert

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=3BB25BA3.1060505@wirex.com \
    --to=crispin@wirex.com \
    --cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
    --cc=greg@kroah.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-security-module@wirex.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox