Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 30 Apr 2004 13:49:57 +0200 | From | Helge Hafting <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Blacklist binary-only modules lying about their license |
| |
Timothy Miller wrote:
> > While we're on all of this, are we going to change "tained" to some > other less alarmist word? Say there is a /proc file or some report that > you can generate about the kernel that simply wants to indicate that the > kernel contains closed-source modules, and we want to use a short, > concise word like "tainted" for this. "An untrusted module has been > loaded into this kernel" would be just a bit too long to qualify. > > Hmmm... how about "untrusted"? Not sure...
"Unsupported" seems a good candidate to me. It describes the situation fairly well. Such a kernel is unsupported by the kernel community, and probably by the binary module vendor too. They tend to restrict support to their own module . . .
Helge Hafting
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |