Re: [PATCH] Blacklist binary-only modules lying about their license

Paul Wagland
2004-04-29T21:11:12Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 840 bytes --]

On Apr 29, 2004, at 17:14, Rik van Riel wrote:

> On Thu, 29 Apr 2004, Timothy Miller wrote:
>
>>> "Due to $MOD_FOO's license ($BLAH), the Linux kernel community
>>> cannot resolve problems you may encounter. Please contact
>>> $MODULE_VENDOR for support issues."
>>
>> Sounds very "politically correct", but certainly more descriptive and
>> less alarming.
>
> More importantly, it directs the support burden to where
> it, IMHO, belongs.

Just to throw in my two cents at the end of this long debate... :-)

I heartily endorse (for what little that is worth ;-) the change in
text. It adds clarity, it provides more information as to where to go
for information. It is hard to misconstrue as a message of impending
doom, consider that a good synonym for tainted is corrupted, and a
corrupted kernel is a bad thing :-).

Cheers,
Paul

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 186 bytes --]