linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH/RFC] alternative aproach to: Ban module license tag string termination trick

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 5 Feb 2007 14:08:51 +0100 (CET)
From:	Bodo Eggert <7eggert@....de>
To:	Alan <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
cc:	Bodo Eggert <7eggert@....de>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ux01.gwdg.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
	Jon Masters <jonathan@...masters.org>,
	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] alternative aproach to: Ban module license tag string
 termination trick

On Sat, 3 Feb 2007, Alan wrote:
> Bodo Eggert <7eggert@....de> wrote:

> > This patch changes the module license handling code to:
> > - allow modules to have multiple licenses
> 
> NAK

I still think it would be a good idea, but if too many people misinterpret 
my concept, you can't do that.

> > - access GPL symbols if at least one license is GPL-compatible
> 
> NAK
> 
> The legal boundary of a work is not "the file".

IMO, the scope of the MODULE_LICENSE is the module. If you intend to ship 
one binary using _only_ the proprietary license, you'll have to remove the 
license=GPL-string. Obviously this isn't obvious. :(

-- 
Backups? We doan NEED no steenking baX%^~,VbKx NO CARRIER 
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/