On Wed, 29 Mar 2006 21:24:59 +0200, "Pascal Terjan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 3/29/06, John Davidorff Pell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> P.S. Why does the list set the reply-to header, isn't that supposed
>> to be a Bad Thing™?
>
> Only according to some people :)
> I hate when I reply to
On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 12:26:37 +0400, Brad Campbell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Fabrice Bellard wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I just released a new version of kqemu which fixes some recently
>> discovered issues. The fixes are the following:
>>
>> - Support for guest Linux kernels compiled with gcc >= 3.3
>
Hi,
kqemu 0.7.x omits the MODULE_LICENSE symbol and does not signify that it taints
the kernel. This is unwanted - kqemu is a proprietary module and it should
expose itself to the kernel as such. It is bad enough that kqemu is closed
source - but it is even worse if kqemu doesn't tell the kern
