Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2019 10:45:35 -0500 From: Shawn Webb <shawn.webb@hardenedbsd.org> To: rgrimes@freebsd.org Cc: "K. Macy" <kmacy@freebsd.org>, svn-src-head@freebsd.org, Matt Macy <mmacy@freebsd.org>, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, Brooks Davis <brooks@freebsd.org>, src-committers <src-committers@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r344487 - in head/sys: conf gnu/gcov Message-ID: <20190226154535.q32nwf6xyupexkta@mutt-hbsd> In-Reply-To: <201902260218.x1Q2Ig4r042692@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> References: <CAHM0Q_NetD%2BbGqtEYEBj0PKEH-G7VuOaTyFH_wdqZHJG5B7FCg@mail.gmail.com> <201902260218.x1Q2Ig4r042692@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--ky43oqzfcdcrljjh Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 06:18:42PM -0800, Rodney W. Grimes wrote: > > > The modest increase in activation energy for that task seems worth it > > > for the short-term gains of reduced integration cost (this code will > > > greatly improve our ZFS-on-Linux test coverage.) > > > > > > Rod rightly points out that we haven't accepted SPDX tags alone as > > > license statements. The standard GPL v2.0 boiler plate should be add= ed > > > to this file along side the tag. > >=20 > > I've copied the full copyright attribution that is in the > > corresponding files on Linux. Is there some reason why FreeBSD > > requires the files to be inflated with the full license text where the > > original lacks it? >=20 > I think for a few reasons, I doubt you copied the whole distribution > that this file came from, as I am sure that distribution included > a LICENSE file. Second if you actually read the GPL v2 documentation > and follow what it says it says you must do this, just because some > one else does not follow the rules of what the GPL v2 says does not > give us to knowingling not do it. Third this is a particular dangerious > area for BSD to be mixing a GPL code with its kernel, to my knowlege > we have never had any gpl code in the kernel, no have we ever > allowed it, but thats a seperate argument, that should be made. Would the arm64 DTS/DTB files count as "GPL code in the kernel?" I, too, would like less GPL in project, both in userland in kernel. But, I can understand the desire for gcov. Note that I'm not advocating either way that FreeBSD perform an action. ;) Thanks, --=20 Shawn Webb Cofounder and Security Engineer HardenedBSD Tor-ified Signal: +1 443-546-8752 Tor+XMPP+OTR: lattera@is.a.hacker.sx GPG Key ID: 0x6A84658F52456EEE GPG Key Fingerprint: 2ABA B6BD EF6A F486 BE89 3D9E 6A84 658F 5245 6EEE --ky43oqzfcdcrljjh Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEKrq2ve9q9Ia+iT2eaoRlj1JFbu4FAlx1XxoACgkQaoRlj1JF bu6kYA//a/sLMSOmr/6lKX43+5eS3GxWoCUUCL1Kg0j4E1454VqrtqeRJqqrKIIi 2S8AFBq6g9hyDW2avPu8YLNkRErr2l24Q+grsdpMnYpx824f4L6L7AneBPP0tgzd 0c7pkrTlnD9GwbpXibxgDIDwnU8keL10ssmNA9HE/n8ZR90HVl8Tdcl5jogvpxs0 WGuZ/0BXOxQtg0en4fZ6+hAs2TbhCZIS6scCnUMeqzI7ZdUbGsbYKRwOOpsF6tHq rSgQXa3nBhT4Y0mW6N5jzetpceriEyr1ookW0+mYlR4TRIf7ICcbGuQLs6scA0sz 79iY5zbQu5CrDQ7BRF6HehuQYrnPz+zLEtt79AMWzqmVZtIVsnmZ8H1Z/qBMwSN/ Gn6YI5AC3xrZLMfC0528JKTt+Z5vHxVZdTpW/94qZVTpBYXxdfqN0jV19kc1hUoE /9+oJZvMOiYkoOi6TXnTDBZXxWbSIxTYd2DX8xz4DLp/mzFeT8cZ0i2RtGr99waa iCaiHWmJA69MbH4dDzneThdIC5k1Lzau0yFKZBY1LLMI7Q8hBlk5GnvMlqYFf47f YqEmgMYMLnHdBF/LlbUOS9SePSiFpxFysqyUOxHCIKTGDGJspHVTvY1GU0Bq9Q2+ hN6Ulia6Vcpxt7f1PkuYh9cfC0nb7fgkRpfwdbmkN/BRF6Mv1Hg= =NEPo -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --ky43oqzfcdcrljjh--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20190226154535.q32nwf6xyupexkta>