From: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
To: Keith Owens <kaos@ocs.com.au>
Cc: "Morgan Collins [Ax0n]" <sirmorcant@morcant.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Tainted Modules Help Notices
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 15:13:03 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4527.1002723183@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <13388.1002721848@ocs3.intra.ocs.com.au>
In-Reply-To: <13388.1002721848@ocs3.intra.ocs.com.au>
kaos@ocs.com.au said:
> David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org> wrote:
> > BSD-licensed modules shouldn't mark the kernel as tainted. If they do,
> > that's surely a bug.
> Any license not listed in include/linux/module.h is not GPL
> compatible. That list is currently (2.4.11)
In the world I live in, the BSD licence without the advertising clause is
GPL compatible.
Hence, the complaint from modutils signifies a bug, either in the wording of
the MODULE_LICENSE tag for the offending module, or in the list of valid
licences. I care not which - that's an implementation issue for you to
decide.
> > The warning should probably read 'Incompatible licence' instead of
> > 'non-GPL', too.
> No. Any license text not approved as GPL compatible is, by
> definition, incompatible.
Er, yes. By definition, incompatible. 'Incompatible' is a good word to use
when warning the user; the problem is not that the licence is non-GPL, but
that is it not _compatible_ with the GPL - now why didn't I think of using
that word?
--
dwmw2
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-10-10 14:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-10-10 8:06 Tainted Modules Help Notices Morgan Collins [Ax0n]
2001-10-10 8:20 ` David Woodhouse
2001-10-10 8:24 ` Morgan Collins [Ax0n]
2001-10-10 8:31 ` David Woodhouse
2001-10-10 13:50 ` Keith Owens
2001-10-10 13:59 ` Alexander Viro
2001-10-10 14:01 ` Keith Owens
2001-10-10 17:30 ` Alan Cox
2001-10-10 18:18 ` David Woodhouse
2001-10-10 20:06 ` Concerned Programmer
2001-10-10 20:28 ` Morgan Collins [Ax0n]
2001-10-10 21:28 ` Keith Owens
2001-10-10 22:03 ` Anthony DeRobertis
2001-10-11 7:27 ` David Woodhouse
2001-10-10 21:17 ` Alan Cox
2001-10-10 23:02 ` Juan Quintela
2001-10-10 23:28 ` Andreas Dilger
2001-10-10 22:29 ` Rob Landley
2001-10-11 2:48 ` 2.4.11 UDF Morgan Collins [Ax0n]
2001-10-11 3:26 ` Craig Whitmore
2001-10-11 8:50 ` Tainted Modules Help Notices Andreas Ferber
2001-10-11 9:25 ` Alan Cox
2001-10-11 9:35 ` Henning P. Schmiedehausen
2001-10-11 9:41 ` Pekka Pietikäinen
2001-10-11 9:48 ` Syed Mohammad Talha
2001-10-11 10:09 ` Concerned Programmer
2001-10-11 10:37 ` Alan Cox
2001-10-11 22:42 ` David Schwartz
2001-10-11 23:40 ` John Alvord
2001-10-12 1:12 ` David Schwartz
2001-10-12 1:32 ` Robert Love
2001-10-11 12:10 ` James Sutherland
2001-10-10 14:13 ` David Woodhouse [this message]
2001-10-10 14:18 ` Alexander Viro
2001-10-10 13:10 ` Alan Cox
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-10-10 14:06 Bonds, Deanna
2001-10-10 14:24 ` Arjan van de Ven
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=4527.1002723183@redhat.com \
--to=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=kaos@ocs.com.au \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sirmorcant@morcant.org \
/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