linux-kernel - Re: SPDX: Appletalk FW license in the kernel

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: <b965d53c-2c01-832c-736c-f7db8d4217cd@redhat.com>
Date:   Tue, 26 Sep 2023 09:49:25 -0400
From:   Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc:     Dave Miller <davem@...hat.com>,
        Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>, jschlst@...ba.org,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-spdx@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: SPDX: Appletalk FW license in the kernel

On 9/26/23 04:02, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 12:34:03AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 09:39:05AM -0400, Prarit Bhargava wrote:
>>> To be clear, I am not asking for their removal, however, I do think a better
>>> license should be issued for these files.  The files were trivially modified
>>> in 2006. It could be that the code in question is now unused and it is just
>>> easier to remove them.
>>>
>>> Is there anyone you know of that we could approach to determine a proper
>>> SPDX License for these files?
>>
>> The code contains firmware that is downloaded to the device.  The proper
>> thing would be to convert them to separate binary files in the
>> linux-firmware packages.  But given that the driver has seen nothing
>> but tree wide cleanups since the dawn of git I suspect there is no
>> maintainer and probably no user left.  The best might be to indeed just
>> remove it and see if anyone screams, in which case we could bring it
>> back after doing the above.
>>
> 
> We should just remove them for now, I have no objection to that at all.
> 
> Want me to send the patch?

Yes, that would be appreciated.  Thanks :)

P.

> 
> thanks,
> 
> greg k-h
>