From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263027AbUEBNFe (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 May 2004 09:05:34 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263033AbUEBNFe (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 May 2004 09:05:34 -0400 Received: from tag.witbe.net ([81.88.96.48]:20996 "EHLO tag.witbe.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263027AbUEBNFY (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 May 2004 09:05:24 -0400 Message-Id: <200405021305.i42D5L625036@tag.witbe.net> Reply-To: From: "Paul Rolland" To: "'Sean Estabrooks'" , "'Marc Boucher'" Cc: , , , , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH] clarify message and give support contact for non-GPL modules Date: Sun, 2 May 2004 15:05:12 +0200 Organization: AS2917 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 In-Reply-To: <20040502084345.4b89d35f.seanlkml@rogers.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Thread-Index: AcQwQzyM/PUvMzYORQ6Wy0/coPQZeAAAg+Sg Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello, I'm definitely no native English speaker, but I wanted to give my pov on this topic... > > Understood. So perhaps we should call it "open" and > "proprietary" which > > are clear, well known words. "tainted" is honestly > confusing/hard to > > understand for many ordinary users, especially > international/non-native > > speakers who do not encounter the word that often (thankfully ;-). > > No. It's tainted. And hopefully if the user is concerned or Agreed. Once you have loaded such a module, your kernel is really "tainted" by something that cannot really be controlled. Proprietary is too much neutral and doesn't reflect what you are now running : some piece of code which may by bloated without anyone being able to control it. > Linux is an open source operating system. There is nothing wrong with > promoting and protecting the code and license. Correct. > I've been looking at the latest version of the patch and > thinking that it is really > wrong for any message to be displayed only once. If the > user is unfortunate > enough to be loading two or more closed-source modules, the second > module should not be hidden by the first. The author of the > second module > should not have their name hidden just because another module > was loaded first. Agreed too. This patch should make its way in the kernel, so that people are aware they are using closed-source code. I simply hope that some "vendors" will not alter kernel code before building to remove such a warning if they include closed source module in their distro. Regards, Paul Paul Rolland, rol(at)as2917.net ex-AS2917 Network administrator and Peering Coordinator -- Please no HTML, I'm not a browser - Pas d'HTML, je ne suis pas un navigateur "Some people dream of success... while others wake up and work hard at it"