From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jan 25 18:44:59 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C87141065673; Wed, 25 Jan 2012 18:44:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rmh.aybabtu@gmail.com) Received: from mail-iy0-f182.google.com (mail-iy0-f182.google.com [209.85.210.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F6848FC1A; Wed, 25 Jan 2012 18:44:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: by iaeo4 with SMTP id o4so2246185iae.13 for ; Wed, 25 Jan 2012 10:44:58 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=rPRb0Qq5fa55bMdiesohRrlL7vSO3zHGbKAPAC5dtgI=; b=CWtzFenpHurHJLJ4bTt4PQWBBhZyx6R20fxkaUgZ/R7HVSocMKjtxUn6UM8UWrsdUM q4cqfQ5/KYuHx5ziNX5l5Z6Tkm0QzM2m4AeKyj2St3S3YfJOPV+S/xVn506g0TmDjGVf zVuFLcJOH6jXSD4kkx7GnRfYmvvelZZhNeBts= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.50.170.97 with SMTP id al1mr5643174igc.1.1327517098619; Wed, 25 Jan 2012 10:44:58 -0800 (PST) Sender: rmh.aybabtu@gmail.com Received: by 10.42.152.10 with HTTP; Wed, 25 Jan 2012 10:44:58 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <20120122201814.GA32081@thorin> <20120123193412.GA353@zim.MIT.EDU> Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 18:44:58 +0000 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 3S4sd2_tfPvwsCwQplj7tCyuBSM Message-ID: From: Robert Millan To: Robert Watson Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: Kostik Belousov , Adrian Chadd , tabthorpe@freebsd.org, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: RFC: MK_BLOBS build option X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 18:45:00 -0000 El 24 de gener de 2012 9:44, Robert Watson ha escrit: > There's a related concern to do with "license leakage" into the GENERIC > kernel. =C2=A0The policy of the project is that the GENERIC kernel should > essentially be BSD-licensed -- GPL, CDDL, etc, code needs to be compiled = out > by default, although compiled into modules is considered fine. =C2=A0One = reason > that KDTRACE_HOOKS is not in GENERIC is that no one has done a careful > review to ensure that it doesn't lead to CDDL in GENERIC. =C2=A0It would = be nice > if we had tools to not only perform those checks, but also allow us to > induce compile failures as part of tinderboxing if something goes wrong. > =C2=A0It's an interesting question as to how "hard line" you get about th= is: how > do we want to treat uuencoded firmware bits in device drivers that allow > unlimited distribution but not reverse engineering, for example? > > I don't want to get into the politics of this, nor the specific spellings= , > except to say that we (a) can't provide guarantees (and especially not > indemnification) to our users but (b) we do want to help them do their jo= bs > more easily, in which case tools to help them analyse their license > obligations when using FreeBSD would have benefit. > > Count me on in Warner's comment regarding "blob" -- binary-only (or, for > that matter, obfuscated) content is a contentious issue. =C2=A0In as much= as we > can provide accurate while less potentially inflamatory descriptions, I > think that's a useful thing to do. =C2=A0Possibly we should keep vaguely = in mind > the IETF mantra of being liberal about what we accept (i.e., support > components under a variety of licenses) and conservative about what we > generate (create as much code as possible under the BSD license). > > However, there is an immediate practical benefit to resolving the DTrace > hooks situation, and some of the tools used to do that would be more broa= dly > relevant. =C2=A0I'd like it very much if we had KDTRACE_HOOKS compiled in= to > GENERIC -- it's one of the reasons why I find myself still using custom > kernels in many configurations. Hi Robert, Thanks for your explanation. I understand why such license tracking system would be useful. I've to admit, though, that I completely lack the time to implement it. The remaining question would be if for the time being it is acceptable to use MK_* build options for manually disabling sourceless code. There's a similar precedent (MK_BSD_GREP) so I would guess that it is. But if you (or anyone else) has a reason why this would be a bad thing, then please explain it :-)