On Thu, 1 Nov 2012 21:34:52 +0000 Matthew Garrett <mjg59@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 01, 2012 at 09:37:51PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote: > > On Thu, 1 Nov 2012 21:28:43 +0000 > > Matthew Garrett <mjg59@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Lawyers won't remove blacklist entries. > > > > Fear Uncertainty and Doubt > > > > Courts do, injunctions do, the possibilty of getting caught with theirs > > hands in the till does. > > I think you've misunderstood. Blacklist updates are append only. I think you've misunderstood - thats a technical detail that merely alters the cost to the people who did something improper. If Red Hat want to ship a kernel that is very very locked down - fine. It's a business choice and maybe it'll sell to someone. The implementation is non-offensive in its mechanism for everyone else so technically I don't care, but the 'quiver before our new masters and lick their boots' stuff isn't a technical (or sane business) approach so can we cut the trying to FUD other people into doing what you believe your new master requires. Alan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-efi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
