Re: [PATCH] make LSM register functions GPLonly exports

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Thu, Oct 17, 2002 at 09:51:06AM -0700, Crispin Cowan wrote:
> My argument against the intent of this change is that no, I do not think 
> we should restrict LSM modules to be GPL-only. LSM is an API for loading 
> externally developed packages of software, similar to syscalls. There is 
> benefit in permitting proprietary modules (you get additional modules 
> that you would not get otherwise) just as there is benefit in permitting 
> proprietary applications (you get Oracle, DB2, and WordPerfect).

My arguement is that I want this flag as a hint for authors of
propritary security modules that I'm going to sue them if they
use hook called from code I have copyright on.  This includes such
central parts as vfs_read/vfs_write.

> no legal standing what so ever. If kernel module interfaces are held by 
> a court to be linking, then export symbols are redundant. If kernel 
> module interfaces are held by a court to be an interface, then the 
> export symbols are just wrong.

It's a very clear hint, and very usefull as such.