>It's not a GPL issue. It's perfectly clear in the stable patches terms of
service that you're *not* supposed to share the patches in the wild.
Supposed != not allowed. Whilst they could in theory revoke access to
whoever shares them, the GPL cannot be overridden by any such terms of
service or no
On lun., 2016-01-11 at 12:05 +, Michael D wrote:
> > It's not a GPL issue. It's perfectly clear in the stable patches terms of
> service that you're *not* supposed to share the patches in the wild.
>
> Supposed != not allowed. Whilst they could in theory revoke access to
> whoever shares them,
On lun., 2016-01-11 at 11:18 +, Michael D wrote:
> Package: linux-grsec
>
> Corsac, in reference to https://www.corsac.net/?rub=blog&post=1583 I would
> like to see some versionless metapackages that we can use to replace
> linux-image-amd64.
Noted :) Note that it won't replace linux-image-am
Package: linux-grsec
Corsac, in reference to https://www.corsac.net/?rub=blog&post=1583 I would
like to see some versionless metapackages that we can use to replace
linux-image-amd64.
Thanks for your work on this project and I hope it will eventually drive up
the popularity of grsecurity once it
4 matches
Mail list logo
