linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH] [39/40] i386: Export paravirt

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

Message-ID: <MDEHLPKNGKAHNMBLJOLKOECCDHAC.davids@webmaster.com>
Date:	Mon, 30 Apr 2007 13:37:15 -0700
From:	"David Schwartz" <davids@...master.com>
To:	"Linux-Kernel@...r. Kernel. Org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] [39/40] i386: Export paravirt_ops for non GPL modulestoo

> FWIW I think doing this first will be better, exposing _all_ to non GNU
> modules will weaken whatever case we might have to take it away later.

> So, NACK from me too.

> I don't want to hear the whining; but it was allowed in .22, so why
> should we not be able to do this in .23.... or whatever.

This is the most illogical and perverse argument I think I have *ever* seen
on this mailing list, and that's saying something.

If people find legitimate uses for it while it's available, that's a proof
that taking it away is wrong. Symbols are supposed to be marked GPL if and
only if it's not possible to use them in non-GPL'd works. So, yeah, let's
not risk letting people prove your position is wrong before you have a
chance to enforce it.

DS

-
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/