OpenVZ Forum


Home » Mailing lists » Devel » Re: namespace support requires network modules to say "GPL"
Re: namespace support requires network modules to say "GPL" [message #24189 is a reply to message #24188] Sun, 02 December 2007 20:43 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Adrian Bunk is currently offline  Adrian Bunk
Messages: 10
Registered: August 2006
Junior Member
On Sun, Dec 02, 2007 at 09:03:56PM +0100, Patrick McHardy wrote:
> Ben Greear wrote:
>> Stephen Hemminger wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Naw, enterprise (or any other) distro vendors shouldn't have any issues 
>>>> here,
>>>> since they can just patch their kernels around any issues.
>>>>
>>>> But it looks like Eric has this one thought out well enough.
>>>>     
>>>
>>> So you are saying all this is not a problem, fine.
>>> Any affected parties can certainly lobby for themselves. But I suspect
>>> they all think the kernel community is a bunch of ... and will just 
>>> ignore
>>> the problem.   
> >
>> I have a binary module that uses dev_get_by_name...it's sort of a 
>> bridge-like thing and
>> needs user-space to tell it which device to listen for packets on...
>>
>> This code doesn't need or care about name-spaces, so I don't see how it 
>> could really
>> be infringing on the author's code (any worse than loading a binary driver 
>> into the kernel
>> ever does).
>>
>> I would certainly prefer to not have to patch around any problems with 
>> calling dev_get_by_name
>> from a non-gpl module, but if required, I can probably figure something 
>> out...
>
>
> For all I care binary modules can break, but frankly I don't see
> how encapsulating a couple of structures and pointers in a new
> structure and adding a new argument to existing functions shifts
> the decision about how a function should be usable to the namespace
> guys. IMO all functions should continue to be usable as before,
> as decided by whoever actually wrote them.
>...

Even ignoring the fact that it's unclear whether distributing modules 
with not GPLv2 compatible licences is legal at all or might bring you in 
jail, your statement has an interesting implication:

Stuff like e.g. the EXPORT_SYMBOL(sk_alloc) predates the 
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL stuff.

Who is considered the author of this code?

And when should he state whether he prefers to use EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL 
but wasn't able to use it at that when he wrote it since his code 
predates it and is glad to be able to decide this now?

cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed

_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: [RFC][for -mm] memory controller enhancements for reclaiming take2 [0/8] introduction
Next Topic: [PATCH] memory.min_usage
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Thu Aug 08 08:19:25 GMT 2024

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.04953 seconds