Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
Again, I agree with EVERY statement Linus made here. We operate exactly as Linus describes, and
legally, NO ONE can take us to task on GPL issues. We post patches of affected kernel code
(albiet the code resembles what Linus describes as a "skeleton driver") and our proprietary
non derived code we sell with our appliances.
Yeah, like this one?
ftp://ftp.soleranetworks.com/pub/solera/dsfs/FedoraCore6/datascout-only-2.6.18-11-13-06.patch
@@ -1316,8 +1316,8 @@
mod->license_gplok = license_is_gpl_compatible(license);
if (!mod->license_gplok && !(tainted & TAINT_PROPRIETARY_MODULE)) {
- printk(KERN_WARNING "%s: module license '%s' taints kernel.\n",
- mod->name, license);
+// printk(KERN_WARNING "%s: module license '%s' taints kernel.\n",
+// mod->name, license);
add_taint(TAINT_PROPRIETARY_MODULE);
}
}
@@ -1691,10 +1691,10 @@
/* Set up license info based on the info section */
set_license(mod, get_modinfo(sechdrs, infoindex, "license"));
- if (strcmp(mod->name, "ndiswrapper") == 0)
- add_taint(TAINT_PROPRIETARY_MODULE);
- if (strcmp(mod->name, "driverloader") == 0)
- add_taint(TAINT_PROPRIETARY_MODULE);
+// if (strcmp(mod->name, "ndiswrapper") == 0)
+// add_taint(TAINT_PROPRIETARY_MODULE);
+// if (strcmp(mod->name, "driverloader") == 0)
+// add_taint(TAINT_PROPRIETARY_MODULE);
/* Set up MODINFO_ATTR fields */
setup_modinfo(mod, sechdrs, infoindex);