linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/5] Net: ath5k, license is GPLv2

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: <3208.1188408545@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
Date:	Wed, 29 Aug 2007 13:29:05 -0400
From:	Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
To:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc:	Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...il.com>, linville@...driver.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] Net: ath5k, license is GPLv2

On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 18:11:55 BST, Christoph Hellwig said:
> On Tue, Aug 28, 2007 at 12:00:50PM -0400, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> > ath5k, license is GPLv2
> > 
> > The files are available only under GPLv2 since now.
> 
> Is this really a good idea?  Most of the reverse-engineering was
> done by the OpenBSD folks, and it would certainly be helpful to
> work together with them on new hardware revisions, etc..

The heck with "good idea" - it's unclear to me if Jiri is even *allowed*
to remove the BSD/other license.   Jiri can release *his* code as GPLv2
only, but I suspect the files as a whole really should be dual BSD/GPLv2,
due to the numerous other stakeholders in those files.

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped