linux-kernel - Re: WTF? Re: [PATCH] License cleanup: add SPDX GPL-2.0 license identifier to files with no license

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: <20171107073940.GB4654@kroah.com>
Date:   Tue, 7 Nov 2017 08:39:40 +0100
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc:     "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>,
        Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>,
        xfs <linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: WTF? Re: [PATCH] License cleanup: add SPDX GPL-2.0 license
 identifier to files with no license

On Mon, Nov 06, 2017 at 11:20:40PM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> NAK, for both the libxfs patch and the kernel one.

What libxfs patch?  And what "kernel one" are you referring to here?

> I wrote the file and it has no copyright header because it conatians
> trivial, non-copyrightable code.

What file exactly?

And from what I know, there is nothing that is "non-copyrightable".

And this isn't changing the copyright of _ANYTHING_ it is just putting
the explicit license of the file, on each file in the kernel, because it
needs to be tracked.

> I don't know why people think they can touch license information on
> files I've written without even asking me.

Nothing was changed, the license should be the exact same as it was
before.  But as I don't know what file you are referring to here, it's a
bit hard to determine what you are talking about exactly :(

thanks,

greg k-h