My understanding is that LKMs have always been considered by Linus to be a use of the kernel, not a derived work, and thus could be closed source. However this isn't explicitly written anywhere. What happens if tomorrow Linus is hit by a bus, and the remaining kernel coders change their minds? This is a bit of a nebulous area. I'd like to see the LSM get accepted, and that by far is the biggest priority. If that means we follow the current style, and consider uses of the LSM to be similar to a standalone LKM and thus not GPL by necessity, then so be it. Users of the LSM are really not doing anything different than they could with their own modules, we're just making it easier and more consistant. When I signed up for the LSM list, and read the purpose of the module, it never occured to me that folks would need to GPL anything that uses it, I actually assumed the opposite. There will be developers that are put off by this proposed change. That all said, I personally would prefer that anything using the LSM be GPLd. This is not just a thumbing of my nose at the proprietary folks, but a security best-practices concern. If this floats with the kernel developers, then I'd go with it. Especially if it helps the chances of getting the LSM accepted. -- Brian Hatch Unlike stupidity, Systems and Genius has its limits. Security Engineer www.hackinglinuxexposed.com Every message PGP signed
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Sep 24 2001 - 11:10:49 PDT