Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 19 Sep 2012 09:58:09 +0400 | From | Michael Tokarev <> | Subject | Re: lve module taint? |
| |
On 19.09.2012 06:02, Rusty Russell wrote:
> From: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org> > Subject: module: taint kernel when lve module is loaded > Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 13:49:31 -0400 > > Cloudlinux have a product called lve that includes a kernel module. This > was previously GPLed but is now under a proprietary license, but the > module continues to declare MODULE_LICENSE("GPL") and makes use of some > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL symbols. Forcibly taint it in order to avoid this.
> + /* lve claims to be GPL but upstream won't provide source */ > + if (strcmp(mod->name, "lve") == 0) > + add_taint_module(mod, TAINT_PROPRIETARY_MODULE);
This is setting a, in my opinion, rather bad precedent. Next we'll be adding various modules here due to various reasons.
I think this case should be pure political now, not technical. Ie, if some project declares itself as GPL, it is not kernel task to verify that the sources are available or to enforce that.
Thanks,
/mjt
| |