linux-kernel - Re: MODULE_LICENSE("GPL")??

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: <501B5D51.5030307@genband.com>
Date:	Thu, 02 Aug 2012 23:10:41 -0600
From:	Chris Friesen <chris.friesen@...band.com>
To:	dmarkh@....rr.com
CC:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: MODULE_LICENSE("GPL")??

On 08/02/2012 06:19 AM, Mark Hounschell wrote:
>
> This particular driver  does in fact build cleanly after changing the 
> GPL to PROPRIETARY. I haven't actually purchased the product yet so am 
> unable to load it, but can I assume that if I don't have a build issue 
> when specifying PROPRIETARY, that they are in fact NOT using GPL 
> symbols and maybe they just thought they needed to specify GPL for 
> some reason or another?

Why not just ask the authors?

Chris
--
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/