* philipp.amm...@posteo.de schrieb am 04.09.15 um 13:33 Uhr: > Am 03.09.2015 23:08 schrieb Marc Schiffbauer: > > True and what I wanted to say with the OTOH part. But doesn't this > > apply > > to any sponsor? I mean we are talking about GPL'ed Software... does the > > GPL permit to distribute source under some kind of NDA? > > > > I fully respect their decision but I hope things will be back to normal > > again soon. > > > > No you can't override the GPL with an NDA. But a sponsor - who is > selling products based on grsecurity - is not required to make the code > available to the general public, only to the customer who pays for the > product. They're also not required to make their /patches/ available, > only the complete source. So even if you get the sources from a customer > (or you buy the product yourself), you would have to diff the code > against a vanilla kernel - and then you only get a huge patch that > includes *all* changes. Extracting just the grsecurity patch from that > is complicated and error prone. You'll probably run into less bugs if > you just stick to the public testing patches.
Yes, but the point I was trying to make is: Such a customer can make the
sources available to the public. I am NOT saying we should do this but
in theory it would be possible.
Lets see what the future brings. This is going to be too OT ;)
-Marc
--
0x35A64134 - 8AAC 5F46 83B4 DB70 8317
3723 296C 6CCA 35A6 4134
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
