On Fri, 2018-04-06 at 18:10 +0200, Xose Vazquez Perez wrote:
>
> It would be nice to have the old cvs repo, from 2003-09-18 multipath-
> 0.0.1 to
> 2005-05-23 multipath-tools-0.4.5, online. Or converted to git.
Found this:
https://web.archive.org/web/20050413224017/http://christophe.varoqui.fr
e
On Sun, Apr 08 2018 at 12:00am -0400,
Ming Lei wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The following kernel oops(divide error) is triggered when running
> xfstest(generic/347) on ext4.
>
> [ 442.632954] run fstests generic/347 at 2018-04-07 18:06:44
> [ 443.839480] divide error: [#1] PREEMPT SMP PTI
> [ 443.8
Hello Christophe,
You've merged the GPL/LGPL patch set from Xose. I'd like to understand
your intentions.
There are >130 files in the multipath-tools source code which don't
have a license header. So far my assumption was that these files were
covered by COPYING, which used to be LGPLv2.0. By cha
Move COPYING -> LICENSES/GPL-2.0
Move COPYING.LESSER -> LICENSES/LGPL-2.0
Add GPL-3.0 and LGPL-2.1 to the LICENSES dir.
Source directly from:
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.txt
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/lgpl-2.1.txt
Cc: Martin Wilck
Cc: Christophe Varoqui
Cc: device-mapper
On 04/09/2018 05:57 PM, Martin Wilck wrote:
> There are >130 files in the multipath-tools source code which don't
> have a license header. So far my *assumption* was that these files were
> covered by COPYING, which used to be LGPLv2.0.
They are under their _original_ licence. Nothing was changed
On Mon, Apr 09 2018 at 11:51am -0400,
Mike Snitzer wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 08 2018 at 12:00am -0400,
> Ming Lei wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > The following kernel oops(divide error) is triggered when running
> > xfstest(generic/347) on ext4.
> >
> > [ 442.632954] run fstests generic/347 at 2018-04-0
On Mon, 2018-04-09 at 19:29 +0200, Xose Vazquez Perez wrote:
> On 04/09/2018 05:57 PM, Martin Wilck wrote:
>
> > There are >130 files in the multipath-tools source code which don't
> > have a license header. So far my *assumption* was that these files
> > were
> > covered by COPYING, which used to
On 4/9/18 12:38 PM, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 09 2018 at 11:51am -0400,
> Mike Snitzer wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Apr 08 2018 at 12:00am -0400,
>> Ming Lei wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> The following kernel oops(divide error) is triggered when running
>>> xfstest(generic/347) on ext4.
>>>
>>> [ 44
Martin is right, the LGPL COPYING was added Sun May 1 15:05:22 2005.
Every file added to the tree since then and up to Xose patch switching
COPYING to GPL, and not explicitely licensed otherwise can be assumed to be
covered by the LGPL.
It was not intended to relicense any files, nor switch to GPL
On 4/9/18 1:32 PM, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 4/9/18 12:38 PM, Mike Snitzer wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 09 2018 at 11:51am -0400,
>> Mike Snitzer wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, Apr 08 2018 at 12:00am -0400,
>>> Ming Lei wrote:
>>>
Hi,
The following kernel oops(divide error) is triggered when running
On Mon, 2018-04-09 at 22:38 +0200, Christophe Varoqui wrote:
> Martin is right, the LGPL COPYING was added Sun May 1 15:05:22 2005.
> Every file added to the tree since then and up to Xose patch
> switching COPYING to GPL, and not explicitely licensed otherwise can
> be assumed to be covered by the
On 4/9/18 3:26 PM, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 4/9/18 1:32 PM, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 4/9/18 12:38 PM, Mike Snitzer wrote:
>>> On Mon, Apr 09 2018 at 11:51am -0400,
>>> Mike Snitzer wrote:
>>>
On Sun, Apr 08 2018 at 12:00am -0400,
Ming Lei wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The following ker
On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 2:56 PM, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 4/9/18 3:26 PM, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 4/9/18 1:32 PM, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>> On 4/9/18 12:38 PM, Mike Snitzer wrote:
On Mon, Apr 09 2018 at 11:51am -0400,
Mike Snitzer wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 08 2018 at 12:00am -0400,
> M
On 4/9/18 4:05 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 2:56 PM, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 4/9/18 3:26 PM, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>> On 4/9/18 1:32 PM, Jens Axboe wrote:
On 4/9/18 12:38 PM, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 09 2018 at 11:51am -0400,
> Mike Snitzer wrote:
>
>>
On mobile, sorry for html crud and top posting, but here:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=e9092d0d97961146655ce51f43850907d95f68c3
Should fix it.
Linus
On Mon, Apr 9, 2018, 14:56 Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 4/9/18 3:26 PM, Jens Axboe wrote:
>
On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 04:10:17PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 4/9/18 4:05 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 2:56 PM, Jens Axboe wrote:
> >> On 4/9/18 3:26 PM, Jens Axboe wrote:
> >>> On 4/9/18 1:32 PM, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 4/9/18 12:38 PM, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> > On Mon
On 4/9/18 4:27 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 04:10:17PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 4/9/18 4:05 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
>>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 2:56 PM, Jens Axboe wrote:
On 4/9/18 3:26 PM, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 4/9/18 1:32 PM, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 4/9/18 12:38
# License assessment for multipath-tools 0.7.6, git 1cb704b
Author: Martin Wilck, 2018-04-10
# DISCLAIMER
I AM NOT A LAWYER.
THIS IS A BEST-EFFORT ASSESSMENT MADE BY A DEVELOPER.
THIS DOCUMENT IS NOT INTENDED AS LEGAL ADVICE.
# Statistics
* LGPLv2.0 ("default license", see below): 120
* GPL
On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 3:32 PM, Jens Axboe wrote:
> That's bad, for sure, but my worry was bigger than an oops or crash,
> we could have had corruption due to this.
>
> The resulting min/max and friends would have been trivial to test, but
> clearly they weren't.
Yeah, that was bad luck and my fa
On 4/9/18 4:38 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 3:32 PM, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> That's bad, for sure, but my worry was bigger than an oops or crash,
>> we could have had corruption due to this.
>>
>> The resulting min/max and friends would have been trivial to test, but
>> clearly they
On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 3:32 PM, Jens Axboe wrote:
>
> The resulting min/max and friends would have been trivial to test, but
> clearly they weren't.
Well, the min/max macros themselves actually were tested in user space by me.
It was the interaction with the unrelated "min_not_zero()" that wasn'
On 4/9/18 5:54 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 3:32 PM, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>
>> The resulting min/max and friends would have been trivial to test, but
>> clearly they weren't.
>
> Well, the min/max macros themselves actually were tested in user space by me.
>
> It was the inte
22 matches
Mail list logo
