On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 03:47:27AM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> Chris Bergeron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Hello all,
> >
> > Building the fglrx module against the current Linux kernel (2.6.20.7
> > as of this e-mail) I'm getting an error:
> >
> > FATAL: modpost: GPL-incompatible module fglr
On 4/19/07, Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The troll is back I see.
Troll, shmoll. I call 'em like I see 'em. As much as I like and
depend on Linux, and as much as I respect the contributions and the
ideals of the EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL partisans, they're spreading needless
FUD by spraying "p
Chris Bergeron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hello all,
>
> Building the fglrx module against the current Linux kernel (2.6.20.7
> as of this e-mail) I'm getting an error:
>
> FATAL: modpost: GPL-incompatible module fglrx.ko uses GPL-only symbol
> 'paravirt_ops'
>
It should probably be availab
> What's happening is that some kernel developers don't like Linus's
> stance on binary-only drivers and are trying to circumvent the norms
> of software copyright law using EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL.
The troll is back I see.
Why don't you give him some useful information instead
- Turn off the paravirt
On 4/19/07, Chris Bergeron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It just seemed like it might be interesting and I couldn't find anything
to shed light on the error itself in the mailing list logs, and I'm
curious at what's happening.
What's happening is that some kernel developers don't like Linus's
stan
5 matches
Mail list logo
