Re: [PATCH] Ban module license tag string termination trick

Jon Masters wrote:
> need a technological mechanism here to enforce the obvious. To me, it
> just seems totally obvious (any legal comment?) that early C string
> termination is undermining the intent of the MODULE_LICENSE tag.
> 

I completely agree with that. It's like I sign a contract and the other
party later makes claims and says: Well, you sure you read the whole
contract? 'Coz in the part that was written with special ink, only
visible under special light, it clearly states that ...

Can't you put this somewhere into the documentation: it's our kernel,
play by our rules, and our rules are, the license is what is visible in
'printf(license)'?

tom
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [PATCH] Ban module license tag string termination trick
    • From: "Trent Waddington" <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [PATCH] Ban module license tag string termination trick
    • From: Jan Engelhardt <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] Ban module license tag string termination trick
    • From: Jon Masters <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 1/1] filesystem: Disk Errors at boot-time caused by probe of partitions
• Next by Date: Re: smp and irq conflict
• Previous by thread: RE: [PATCH] Ban module license tag string termination trick
• Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] Ban module license tag string termination trick
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]