From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C3931381F4 for ; Sun, 9 Dec 2012 18:23:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9ACA921C04D; Sun, 9 Dec 2012 18:23:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com (out4-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.28]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C5EBE21C024 for ; Sun, 9 Dec 2012 18:22:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.mail.srv.osa [10.202.2.44]) by gateway1.nyi.mail.srv.osa (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32D85206E0 for ; Sun, 9 Dec 2012 13:22:32 -0500 (EST) Received: from frontend1.nyi.mail.srv.osa ([10.202.2.160]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 09 Dec 2012 13:22:32 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id :references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; s=smtpout; bh=Bhh1Xfge0+PkMy6TQdAN6/3zmWE=; b=TFuoy7UqrGm/ZkN66+Wliap4Dj5U jaTayL7EnKva29nHS+jdgWwFzcclUljC63NUfdHxc7zssQg4yPyLDa4BrTTbWtvV OjTgvCKrG8nl57r/HInWUgmt1IZv0XU4kNERP0QWUOnnuXXxPtlAl5Tf85Ppv8Qc TNkMia9Yhtd3nd4= X-Sasl-enc: S1+uO5Y2p72fz2gS9faID0q9QFAlWUMSCp6fdufmNWen 1355077351 Received: from localhost (unknown [50.137.166.34]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id C790C8E05BC; Sun, 9 Dec 2012 13:22:31 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2012 10:24:52 -0800 From: Greg KH To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] borked release media Message-ID: <20121209182452.GA6301@kroah.com> References: Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Archives-Salt: b6f75b80-0bb0-49d5-bcee-b95cf491c4f3 X-Archives-Hash: 691ac540723160f4f88c6e1327320bbc On Sun, Dec 09, 2012 at 01:13:38PM -0500, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Sun, Dec 9, 2012 at 1:07 PM, Fernando Reyes > wrote: > > I don't know the details of the issue but I know that I was prevented from using grub on the livedvd. > > Well, if some perceived legal constraint is keeping us from doing > whatever seems to be technically most appropriate we should > investigate the matter and resolve it. If, on the other hand, it > simply makes sense to use something else, then no sense belaboring the > point. > > People just seem to be really paranoid about GPLv3 and Grub. We're > already talking to the FSF about how they handle copyright attribution > on their own projects, so I suppose we could get their opinion on UEFI > as well. However, I don't see anything in the language of the license > that creates a problem when using it with UEFI, unless one wants to > sell locked-down hardware. Doing that would be a violation of our > social contract, let alone the GPLv3. The FSF has already said that using Grub2 and the GPLv3 is just fine with the UEFI method of booting, so there is no problem from that side. There's a statement about this somewhere on their site if you are curious. The only one objecting to GPLv3 and UEFI is the current rules for getting a shim/bootloader signed by Microsoft, but the current implementations we have all have either a GPLv2 or BSD licensed shim which then loads GRUB, so all is fine from a licensing and legal standpoint from everyone involved. Hope this helps, greg k-h