Re: [PATCH] Blacklist binary-only modules lying about their license

[Rick Zeman]

On 4/28/04 at 8:02 PM (GMT-0400), Rik van Riel <riel@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>I wouldn't be averse to changing the text the kernel prints
>when loading a module with an incompatible license. If the
>text "$MOD_FOO: module license '$BLAH' taints kernel." upsets
>the users, it's easy enough to change it.
>
>How about the following?
>
>"Due to $MOD_FOO's license ($BLAH), the Linux kernel community
>cannot resolve problems you may encounter. Please contact
>$MODULE_VENDOR for support issues."

That's too sensible:  Linux wouldn't be Linux without incomprehensible
messages like:

$ sudo urpmi /home/rzeman/kernel-smp-2.4.25.4mdk-1-1mdk.i586.rpm 

installing /home/rzeman/kernel-smp-2.4.25.4mdk-1-1mdk.i586.rpm
Preparing...
##################################################
   1:kernel-smp-2.4.25.4mdk
##################################################
look like there was a problem, the default vmlinuz version is not the same 
of the initrd which mean you have a mdk kernel and not a mdk initrd you may
go in trouble

or doing a menuconfig on a new 2.4.26 kernel and having it nicely tell me
that my choice HAD to be a module, not built in, because it depends upon
something else already selected as a module--without bothering to deign to
say what the dependency was so I had to play grand guessing games.

/this week's irritations.

--
Mac OS X: Because making UNIX user-friendly was easier than fixing Windows.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/