Re: GPL only usage of security.h

Previous message: Crispin Cowan: "Re: GPL only usage of security.h"
In reply to: Crispin Cowan: "Re: GPL only usage of security.h"
Next in thread: richard offer: "Re: GPL only usage of security.h"
Next in thread: Sandy Harris: "Re: GPL only usage of security.h"
Reply: richard offer: "Re: GPL only usage of security.h"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

gregat_private

On Mon, Sep 24, 2001 at 10:22:15PM -0700, Crispin Cowan wrote:
> 
> You mentioned the MODULE_LICENSE macro in some other mail, but I've 
> never heard of it, and neither has google. Can you elaborate?

Take a look at module.h in the 2.4.10 kernel, and the comment there
right before the MODULE_LICENSE definition, it explains why it exists.

Also check out these lkml threads that discuss it:
	http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=99948188900001&w=2&r=1
and
	http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=100116504000001&w=2&r=1

greg k-h

_______________________________________________
linux-security-module mailing list
linux-security-moduleat_private
http://mail.wirex.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-security-module