tainting doesn't prevent any modules from loading. If your modules are not loading, its something else. Modules that "taint" the kernel, but shouldn't (like pcmcia-cs) are buggy and should be fixed.
IMHO, there's no reason to bitch about this. On Fri, 2001-12-28 at 02:22, k l u r t wrote: > On Thursday 27 December 2001 11:55 pm, martin f krafft wrote: > > what's this business about tainting the kernel with non-GPL modules??? > > more importantly, how do i disable/go around it. > > > > i am *only* trying to install pcmcia-modules from unstable (3.1.29) > > with my 2.4.17 kernel, and this is annoying!!! > > > > even though modprobe seemingly only bitches about tainting when ds.o, > > cb_enabler.o, and i82365.o are loaded (they load fine), tulip_cb.o (or > > any other high-level module for that matter) won't load at all. what > > gives??? is this a "feature"? i though it was an -ac patch thing, but > > it made it into the main tree??? > > > > please tell me how to solve this... thanks! > > yeah.. isn't it cute?! > > ---- from LWN ----- http://lwn.net/2001/0906/kernel.php3 > > the loading of a proprietary module will "taint" a running kernel, and > greatly reduce the user's chance of getting help from the core kernel > hackers. this has always been the case; the only change is that it has, > evidently, become necessary for the kernel to track its own taintedness. > > this tracking will happen via a sysctl flag like /proc/sys/kernel/tainted; > the loading of a non-GPL module (or one lacking license information) will > cause that flag to be set. once set, the tainted flag can not be reset > without rebooting. the tainted flag will be printed whenever the system > panics, and post-mortem tools (i.e. ksymoops) will recover it as well. so > anybody trying to track down a kernel problem will be able to see quickly if > proprietary modules have ever been loaded. > > if users lie about which modules they load, they could conceivably mess with > the tainted setting. but people aren't too worried about that happening; most > users who would be able to do that are probably not the type who actually > would. and, besides, as Alan Cox points out, in the U.S. such an act could be > seen as defeating a digital rights management scheme, and subject the guilty > party to a five-year prison sentence, plus extra for conspiracy... > > ---- > > I remember reading that there is a patch to get rid of that message... but .. > when i went to look for it, i was unable to find it (i think i saw it > mentioned on debianplanet, which is currently down as i post this). > supposedly, you wont see that message again unless your have a kernel panic. > so, as the saying goes.. its not a bug, its a feature. : ) > > - k l u r t > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED],yucs.org} http://yucs.org/~spotter/
