Discussion:
I hate you, Greg.
(too old to reply)
Eugen Leitl
2005-10-26 11:52:39 UTC
Permalink
----- Forwarded message from Michael Neuffer <***@neuffer.info> -----

From: Michael Neuffer <***@neuffer.info>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 13:46:18 +0200
To: Eugen Leitl <***@leitl.org>
Cc: debian-***@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Asus A8N-E: /sbin/init: 432: cannot open dev/console: No such file
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11
I've built me an Asus A8N-E (nForce4 ultra chipset) system
after having read of successful Debian AMD64 installations.
http://lists.debian.org/debian-amd64/2005/09/msg00219.html
Now I'm stuck with the usual
/sbin/init: 432: cannot open dev/console: No such file
Kernel panic: Attempted to kill init!
on about every Debian-derived (just tried Ubuntu-server 5.10 AMD64),
system, including Sarge and daily Etch .iso builds.
Before I spend some more time I don't have with this system,
does anyone have a magic modprobe, a pointer to an .iso that would
work out of the box, or is otherwise willing to help?
This seems to be a problem with the "recent" kernels
and the way the static dev -> devfs -> udev migrations
are handeled.

Your static /dev is very probably completely empty.
Until recently the kernel would provide sufficient
entries via devfs early on in the boot process even before
init kicks in.

Due to Gregh KHs crusade against devfs this is no longer
the case and you have a problem.

The fix is to boot from a live or recue CD,
mount your root filesystem, cd into the mounted
and empty dev directory and run "MAKEDEV update",
maybe followed by a "MAKEDEV console" just to
make sure that the console devices really get
created and your static dev directory gets
repopulated in general.


Hope this helps.


Cheers
Mike

----- End forwarded message -----
--
Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
Greg KH
2005-10-26 15:00:58 UTC
Permalink
And the point of this message was what?

If you have a problem with me personally, fine get in line over there
behind the others and I'll add you to my procmail filters (right now
john gilmore is at the rear of that line for some misguided reason:
http://www.toad.com/gnu/sysadmin/index.html#keyspan
)

If you have a problem with the way Debian handles udev, I'll point you
to the proper place to complain about that. Debian is slowly sinking
into the muck and it's fun watching it happen.

If you want to lament about devfs going away and I should have never
taken such a wonderful thing out of the kernel, and how horrible I am
for breaking your machine that had been working for the past eight
years, then just do that. I have quite the interesting collection of
these misguided and ill-informed messages and one more would certianly
be a welcome addition.

And if you just want to whine because things change, and try to pick on
someone else for you not following directions properly, well, bully for
you. Feel better now?

bah.

greg k-h
Teh Entar-Nick
2005-10-26 16:54:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Greg KH
And the point of this message was what?
Just Head-Freezin' 'gene's forward habit. He's a lot like the
internet-newbie archetype in that respect. He never even adds his own
commentary, and seldom trims his headers.

We had to holler and yell on the pigdog list to keep him from BOUNCING
mails to the list, in the old days. Fortunately for us, almost no list
software permits that any more.
--
Hey, how come nobody here in the future Nick Moffitt
has a time machine except me? ***@teh.entar.net
Teh Entar-Nick
2005-10-26 19:57:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Teh Entar-Nick
We had to holler and yell on the pigdog list to keep him from
BOUNCING mails to the list, in the old days. Fortunately for us,
almost no list software permits that any more.
Ha, mutt has no such issues.
Your posts are not making it to the list because you're not using mutt's
list-reply feature. You have failed the l-e intelligence test.

And what "issues" do you mean? mutt has both bounce and forward
features, and bouncing to lists is still a PITA. You have fixed nothing
beyond moving to blind forwarding, and you're still running roughshod
over list etiquette.
--
A: No. Nick Moffitt
Q: Should I put my reply above quoted text? ***@teh.entar.net
George Georgalis
2005-10-26 21:13:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Teh Entar-Nick
Your posts are not making it to the list because you're not using mutt's
list-reply feature. You have failed the l-e intelligence test.
Bah. I got chastised for sending confirm requests to list posts
when I hadn't even sent a single one, only pro-actively apologized
before I positively knew that I hadn't sent any.

I wouldn't characterize that kind of hot response as coming from
any kind of elite, but the tone is typical of this list. And if
I too have failed a l-e intelligence test, well this wasn't for
that assessment but mutt has sucked since at least 1995.

If there is no place for user compassion by linux-elitist, only
or mostly ridicule, what is there to gain by becoming one of the
elite? Don't bother telling me, I don't want to be like you.

btw - if you use qmail, and set QMAILMFTFILE=${HOME}/.list
you can run this

sedfilter='#---begin---
s/#.*//; # Remove all comments
s/[ \t]*//g; # Remove whitespace
$!{ # Except on last line ..
/^[ \t]*$/d; # .. delete blank lines
H; # .. copy to hold space
d; # .. and start over.
}
# On the last line ...
x; # Switch pattern and hold space
G; # Entire file is now in patt space
s/^\n//; # Del leading newline
s/\n$//; # Del trailing newline
# s/\./\\./g; # Change . to \.
s/\n/|/g; # Change \n to |
#---end-----'
subscribe="subscribe (`sed "$sedfilter" $HOME/.list`)"
sed "/^subscribe/s/^subscribe.*/$subscribe/" ~/.muttrc-$$ >~/.muttrc-$$
mv ~/.muttrc-$$ ~/.muttrc


and you put the lists you are subscribed to in that file, you'll
have mutt know what list you subscribe to while qmail-inject adds
the right Follup-to when you send messages. It was no simple task
determining all what needed doing and I couldn't have worked it out
without the friendly help over at sed-users.

excuse me, this must be common knowledge here...

// George
--
George Georgalis, systems architect, administrator <IXOYE><
http://galis.org/ cell:646-331-2027 mailto:***@galis.org
Teh Entar-Nick
2005-10-26 21:38:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Teh Entar-Nick
Your posts are not making it to the list because you're not using
mutt's list-reply feature. You have failed the l-e intelligence
test.
I wouldn't characterize that kind of hot response as coming from any
kind of elite, but the tone is typical of this list. And if I too
have failed a l-e intelligence test, well this wasn't for that
assessment but mutt has sucked since at least 1995.
By "intelligence test" I of course meant the posting filters. I suppose
congratulations are in order for you, as you managed to pass the filters
without using mutt (haven't checked your user-agent, but I assume you
found some other way to do a list-reply without all the useless Ccs).
If there is no place for user compassion by linux-elitist, only
or mostly ridicule, what is there to gain by becoming one of the
elite? Don't bother telling me, I don't want to be like you.
Next you'll say that this list is for *helping people*, yes?
btw - if you use qmail,
"...you have already lost."

Really, I understand the rest of your mail, but this crazy reference to
proprietary abandonware in a Free Software elitism list is an obvious
troll (Just like 'gene's little sop to Greg K-H).

[crazy sed foofoo snipped]
and you put the lists you are subscribed to in that file, you'll
have mutt know what list you subscribe to while qmail-inject adds
the right Follup-to when you send messages. It was no simple task
determining all what needed doing and I couldn't have worked it out
without the friendly help over at sed-users.
Okay, I use procmail:

MAILDIR=Maildir/

# This one rule alone handles 99% of mailing list software out there.
:0:
* ^(X-(Mailing-)?[Ll]ist(-Id)?:( "[^"]+")? <?|Sender: owner-|X-BeenThere: |Delivered-To: mailing list |X-Loop:)\/[-A-Za-z0-9_+]+
$MATCH/

And then my .muttrc:

lists `cd ~/Maildir && echo *`
mailboxes `echo ~/Maildir/*/`

...and then the magical L key just does a list-reply.
George Georgalis, systems architect, administrator <IXOYE><
Ιχθύς!

I always wanted to make one of those that just says <FISH>< to match the
Greek ones. But I don't drive, and then people would think it's those
Physh hippies nowadays anyway.
--
"Forget the damned motor car Nick Moffitt
and build cities for lovers and friends." ***@zork.net
-- Lewis Mumford
Greg Folkert
2005-10-27 01:28:09 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 2005-10-26 at 14:38 -0700, Teh Entar-Nick wrote:
[...]
Post by Teh Entar-Nick
By "intelligence test" I of course meant the posting filters. I suppose
congratulations are in order for you, as you managed to pass the filters
without using mutt (haven't checked your user-agent, but I assume you
found some other way to do a list-reply without all the useless Ccs).
CTRL+L in Evolution. (And long before it became a preset too)

In fact I believe I mentioned this on this list before.
--
greg, ***@gregfolkert.net

The technology that is
Stronger, better, faster: Linux
Teh Entar-Nick
2005-10-27 06:36:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Greg Folkert
CTRL+L in Evolution. (And long before it became a preset too)
Ah yes. Evolution sure is a powerful and full-featured groupware suite!

Pity about the e-mail, though.
--
"I think that software engineering would help to prevent Nick Moffitt
things like imake." ***@zork.net
-- Jon Webb
Rick Moen
2005-10-26 22:16:47 UTC
Permalink
I got chastised for sending confirm requests to list posts when I
hadn't even sent a single one, only pro-actively apologized before I
positively knew that I hadn't sent any.
Ah, I had wondered about that incident.

If/when you have time, it would be appreciated if you could detail whatever
C-R system you use so appropriate regexes could be added to the list at
http://www.softwolves.pp.se/blog/2004-06-23,en . That list (Peter
Karlsson's) comprises procmail recipes, but it's not hard to craft
versions in various MTAs' rule syntax to enforce 55x SMTP-time rejects.

Karlsson's list is already quite useful, and should be helped along as
people encounter more C-R varieties.
Eugen Leitl
2005-10-27 06:44:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Teh Entar-Nick
Ha, mutt has no such issues.
Your posts are not making it to the list because you're not using mutt's
list-reply feature. You have failed the l-e intelligence test.
Since when has elitists turned into crackmonkey?
Post by Teh Entar-Nick
And what "issues" do you mean? mutt has both bounce and forward
features, and bouncing to lists is still a PITA. You have fixed nothing
beyond moving to blind forwarding, and you're still running roughshod
over list etiquette.
Again, in small letters, so even you can get it: I had an issue with
an install (Greg's blameless actually, it was an old partition on some drive
with bootable flag on) which was answered on debian-amd64 to the effect
that Greg Kroah broke leenucks, again. I thought it funny to write
"I hate you, Greg" in the subject line when forwarding an answer to my own message.

Apparently you're just as humor-impaired as Greg, and now I've anyway ruined
the joke by diagramming it.

Now I still don't understand Greg's glee about Debian slowly sinking
into the muck. Some of the packages are stale, and security updates have been
nonexistent for a brief while, but I don't see why a noncommercial
effort (the last volunteer effort with no commercial backing) has to
end this way.

Allright, it's Ubuntu server 5.10 AMD64 for me, for time being.
--
Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
Teh Entar-Nick
2005-10-27 06:57:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Eugen Leitl
Post by Teh Entar-Nick
Ha, mutt has no such issues.
Your posts are not making it to the list because you're not using
mutt's list-reply feature. You have failed the l-e intelligence
test.
Since when has elitists turned into crackmonkey?
*sigh*

Yes, I expected this. That list has been dead for *years* now, and
still people use "this isn't crackmonkey, maaan!" whenever I say things
they don't like.

No, this list is not crackmonkey. But it does still have some of the
same filters (and more!) and I did you a service by pointing out how you
had failed to pass them. Future displays of gratitude will be accepted
in the form of cash payments or gift certificates at classicshaving.com.
Post by Eugen Leitl
Now I still don't understand Greg's glee about Debian slowly sinking
into the muck. Some of the packages are stale, and security updates
have been nonexistent for a brief while, but I don't see why a
noncommercial effort (the last volunteer effort with no commercial
backing) has to end this way.
Allright, it's Ubuntu server 5.10 AMD64 for me, for time being.
Yeah, and therein lies another horrifying epic.

I had the chance to ask a debian developer about his own particular
hatred for Ubuntu. He started with how they are just a fork and they
steal people from Debian and don't contribute back. Later he accused
Ubuntu developers of "spamming" the changelogs of Debian packages, by
contributing their changes back.

He then pointed out that the destruction of Debian is in Ubuntu's best
interest, and that is why they hate it so. This was shortly after he
snickered about how Ubuntu was just a thin veneer on Debian and needed
it to do all their work for them.

In the end it came down to "ha ha GNOME", which I appreciate at least.
But all my explanations that I've come to *like* the 6-month release
cycle fell to the usual "who needs releases!" stuff (answer: the users,
since many of them can't or won't put up with the "it doesn't happen
that often" crap that unstable finds itself into not-that-often).

But yeah, I hope Debian sticks around long enough to make Ubuntu really
shine, and I hope that Ubuntu finally manages to show Debian How It Is
Done.

But in the end, Ubuntu is supposed to steal users back from OSX, not
pillage the last of the Debian weenies!
--
The insipid neologism "blog" appears to mean little more Nick Moffitt
than a Web site that *actually* gets updated, as opposed ***@zork.net
to one that *promises* to be updated REAL SOON NOW and
includes an animation of a MEN AT WORK sign.
Aaron Sherman
2005-10-27 13:06:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Eugen Leitl
Post by Teh Entar-Nick
Ha, mutt has no such issues.
Your posts are not making it to the list because you're not using
mutt's list-reply feature. You have failed the l-e intelligence
test.
Intelligence would involve BCCing to get around the filters, correct? ;)

I was an early "fail" on that particular test, and much to everyone's
benefit it has meant that I contribute only rarely over the years, as I
tend to treat "To" in RFC2822-compliant mail much the same as "wa" in
Japanese: it sets up context in order to allow me to then speak in the
second person without ambiguity.
I did you a service by pointing out how you had failed to pass them.
Being insulting is never a favor of any sort, billions of claims to the
contrary on Slashdot notwithstanding.
Post by Eugen Leitl
Now I still don't understand Greg's glee about Debian slowly sinking
into the muck. Some of the packages are stale, and security updates
have been nonexistent for a brief while, but I don't see why a
noncommercial effort (the last volunteer effort with no commercial
backing) has to end this way.
I'll point out that you're using a very special definition of
"commercial backing" indeed if you consider Debian to be free of such a
scourge... Then again, I'm not yet clear on why funding is a bad thing,
but I'm sure someone can find a passage in the Little Red Book that will
explain it to me.
Greg Folkert
2005-10-27 15:51:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Aaron Sherman
I did you a service by pointing out how you had failed to pass them.
Being insulting is never a favor of any sort, billions of claims to the
contrary on Slashdot notwithstanding.
Billions? BILLIONS? When did they start purging?
Post by Aaron Sherman
Post by Eugen Leitl
Now I still don't understand Greg's glee about Debian slowly sinking
into the muck. Some of the packages are stale, and security updates
have been nonexistent for a brief while, but I don't see why a
noncommercial effort (the last volunteer effort with no commercial
backing) has to end this way.
I'll point out that you're using a very special definition of
"commercial backing" indeed if you consider Debian to be free of such a
scourge... Then again, I'm not yet clear on why funding is a bad thing,
but I'm sure someone can find a passage in the Little Red Book that will
explain it to me.
People consider funding a bad thing. Sort of like... bribing or like
lobby groups "making a political contribution" to certain candidates,
for of course "nothing" in return later on.

Or it causes things *REALLY* needing work done, to being ignored so the
funded "Fun" part can get the "oh wowee" effect. All be it fun, then
whom >really< needs documentation, don't we all just _KNOW_ this stuff?
I *KNOW* I do.
--
greg, ***@gregfolkert.net

The technology that is
Stronger, Better, Faster: Linux

Use Debian GNU/Linux, its a bazaar thing.
Greg KH
2005-10-27 16:40:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Eugen Leitl
Now I still don't understand Greg's glee about Debian slowly sinking
into the muck. Some of the packages are stale, and security updates have been
nonexistent for a brief while, but I don't see why a noncommercial
effort (the last volunteer effort with no commercial backing) has to
end this way.
Glee? It's not so much glee, as it is sad that it is slowly being taken
down by the pure size and infinite combinations of packages that need to
be accommodated.

Debian wouldn't bother me at all if it wasn't for them trying to tell
me, and other kernel developers how wrong we are for different things
(the firmware issue is a perfict example.) I get upset Debian
developers and users emailing me every week asking why I don't have a
separate package for my drivers that have been ripped out of the Debian
kernel so that they can use their hardware. As I have no such package,
they go away angry, and blame me for something someone else decided to
do.

greg k-h

Greg KH
2005-10-26 17:07:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Greg KH
And the point of this message was what?
To jerk your chain, of course.
*plonk*
Rick Moen
2005-10-26 23:03:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Greg KH
And if you just want to whine because things change, and try to pick on
someone else for you not following directions properly, well, bully for
you. Feel better now?
As Nick said, Gene forwards stuff. And who are we to say it's not art?
Post by Greg KH
If you want to lament about devfs going away and I should have never
taken such a wonderful thing out of the kernel, and how horrible I am
for breaking your machine that had been working for the past eight
years, then just do that.
Or you can just sit back and wait for Usenet's Lumber Cartel (TINLC) to
sue them for violation of the patent on methods for energetically
flaying deceased equines.

Any number of things could have saved that horse, including Gooch not
hiding in a cave for years. But, as it is, the filly's stone dead and
even my opinion that removal was inevitable irrespective of udev's
(considerable and growing) merits won't resurrect it.
Post by Greg KH
If you have a problem with me personally, fine get in line over there
behind the others and I'll add you to my procmail filters (right now
http://www.toad.com/gnu/sysadmin/index.html#keyspan
)
Although nobody could fault you for annoyance with whines-without-patch,
you might consider not taking it personally. Just a thought.

Proprietary inclusions in kernelspace strike me as a mess that just
happened without significant overall plan[1], but can be straightened
out and clarified among people of good will.

Not that you asked, but I have some half-baked thoughts that I might as
well air here, using Keyspan (or, well, the cited description of the
Keyspan donnybrook) as an example -- per my preference, not as a vehicle
for advocacy, but rather seeking clarity.

The code in question is described as "binary firmware". Such matters
have arisen before concerning, say, Prism54 802.11g wireless drivers (as
implemented in Linux until, I gather, recently). My ancient Lucent
Orinoco-based card has certain very low-level functions built into a
ROM. The Prism54 chip's design, by contrast, elects to save the cost of
EPROMs and shuffle off the _very same_ functions into a binary blob[1].
Intersil wrote that blob, apparently issued redistribution permission to
authorised distributors only, and then died. Globespanvirata inherited
the corpse, which in turn died and ended up being buried by Conexant,
which disavows all knowledge and would like us all to go away and buy
winmodems.

The blob can be flung into working memory at the time of hardware
initialisation, under any operating system, present or future, exactly
as if it had been loaded from ROM, by mechanisms such as Linux's
(userspace) hotplug subsystem. Effectively, it is part of hardware
initialisation -- exactly as my Lucent's ROM is.

My own view is that because the blob has exactly the same initialisation
function as my Lucent's ROM, and is entirely OS-neutral, at least in the
abstract it's no more of concern than that ROM is (other than the
regrettable omission of a public grant of permission to redistribute).

The Keyspan "binary firmware" might be of the same sort -- judging from
the description. If so, the authors might be asserting that it isn't
a derivative work of the kernel itself -- and good luck to them on that
(or whatever luck the legal gods bestow). It might be better to load it
via /sbin/hotplug -- but I can well understand your "Well, send a patch"
reaction.
Post by Greg KH
If you have a problem with the way Debian handles udev, I'll point you
to the proper place to complain about that. Debian is slowly sinking
into the muck and it's fun watching it happen.
Such rancour! Did Software in the Public Interest steal your lunch money?


[1] Witness Torvalds's meandering (if consistently imperious) policy,
which I've tracked here: "Proprietary Kernel Modules" on
http://linuxmafia.com/kb/Kernel/

[2] http://web.archive.org/web/20041011065517/http://prism54.org/~mcgrof/firmware/
--
Cheers, Never anger a bard, for your name sounds funny and
Rick Moen scans to many popular songs.
***@linuxmafia.com -- Stephen Savitzky
Greg KH
2005-10-27 00:17:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rick Moen
Any number of things could have saved that horse, including Gooch not
hiding in a cave for years. But, as it is, the filly's stone dead and
even my opinion that removal was inevitable irrespective of udev's
(considerable and growing) merits won't resurrect it.
Yeah, but you should see the people that pop up every time I send in a
patch to delete it from the kernel tree, it's amazing...
Post by Rick Moen
Post by Greg KH
If you have a problem with me personally, fine get in line over there
behind the others and I'll add you to my procmail filters (right now
http://www.toad.com/gnu/sysadmin/index.html#keyspan
)
Although nobody could fault you for annoyance with whines-without-patch,
you might consider not taking it personally. Just a thought.
I don't take it personally, I find it pretty funny that people can get
so worked up about something that they can help change if they really
want to.
Post by Rick Moen
The Keyspan "binary firmware" might be of the same sort -- judging from
the description.
It is.
Post by Rick Moen
If so, the authors might be asserting that it isn't a derivative work
of the kernel itself -- and good luck to them on that (or whatever
luck the legal gods bestow).
A number of lawyers that I have consulted about this agree that it isn't
a derivative work just because of the reasons you cited.
Post by Rick Moen
It might be better to load it via /sbin/hotplug -- but I can well
understand your "Well, send a patch" reaction.
It would be better, I fully agree. My main complaint these past 5 years
is that people love to argue about it, yet not actually do the work. I
put the work at about 3-4 hours max.
Post by Rick Moen
Post by Greg KH
If you have a problem with the way Debian handles udev, I'll point you
to the proper place to complain about that. Debian is slowly sinking
into the muck and it's fun watching it happen.
Such rancour! Did Software in the Public Interest steal your lunch money?
No, I wish them the best of luck, but it's not looking very good from
the view up here in the cheap seats.
Post by Rick Moen
[1] Witness Torvalds's meandering (if consistently imperious) policy,
which I've tracked here: "Proprietary Kernel Modules" on
http://linuxmafia.com/kb/Kernel/
I, and others who hold copyrights on portions of the kernel are saying
very clear things about this now, "proprietary kernel modules are
illegal." It's pretty simple. Lots of major companies agree with us
too, along with their legal departments, so we aren't just pissing in
the wind here.

Oh, and at least one major distro has been served with legal papers due
to them shipping closed source kernel drivers, and more are on the way.
That's the direction some developers are taking. Others, myself
included, as taking the technical way and just making it so damn hard to
write and ship a closed kernel module, that they will just give up
eventually. Combine that with the EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL() stuff in the
kernel, and I give it about 1-2 more years before it's just technically
impossible to write such a module.

thanks,

greg k-h
Ben Finney
2005-10-27 00:31:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Greg KH
I don't take it personally, I find it pretty funny that people can
get so worked up about something that they can help change if they
really want to.
I agree with John Gilmore that the problem is non-free software being
shipped in a free OS, and that pushing the problem to userspace
doesn't solve it.

I agree with Greg KH that "do the work if you don't like it" is a
reasonable response, when it's possible to solve the problem by work.

When the problem is someone else's non-free driver, the number of
people who can solve the problem is fairly small. It includes the
copyright holder of the non-free software, which is why users try to
pressure them to do that work or allow others to do so.

I can see that your approach is also trying to get to that goal, by a
different route.
Post by Greg KH
Oh, and at least one major distro has been served with legal papers
due to them shipping closed source kernel drivers, and more are on
the way. That's the direction some developers are taking. Others,
myself included, as taking the technical way and just making it so
damn hard to write and ship a closed kernel module, that they will
just give up eventually. Combine that with the EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL()
stuff in the kernel, and I give it about 1-2 more years before it's
just technically impossible to write such a module.
I highly laud your efforts and intentions. Thanks, Greg.

I also laud the efforts of those pressuring non-free driver vendors
through other channels. It's all needed to make it consistently,
chronically (as opposed to acutely) clear that *customers* want this
situation improved also.
--
\ "A child of five could understand this. Fetch me a child of |
`\ five." -- Groucho Marx |
_o__) |
Ben Finney <***@benfinney.id.au>
Rick Moen
2005-10-27 01:21:48 UTC
Permalink
Quoting Greg KH (***@kroah.com):

[snipping any number of thoughtful comments, and meaning no disrespect:]
Post by Greg KH
I, and others who hold copyrights on portions of the kernel are saying
very clear things about this now, "proprietary kernel modules are
illegal." It's pretty simple. Lots of major companies agree with us
too, along with their legal departments, so we aren't just pissing in
the wind here.
As a fan of clarity, I'm a major fan of your writings on that and
similar topics (e.g., your "Stable API Nonsense" page and the resulting
several rounds with a Sun Microsystems flunkie).
Post by Greg KH
thanks,
You're very welcome.
Loading...