Re: [PATCH] target: Update copyright ownership to 2012

2012-11-11 Thread James Bottomley
On Fri, 2012-11-09 at 23:00 +, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote: diff --git a/drivers/target/target_core_alua.c b/drivers/target/target_core_alua.c index 4c8eea2..035c606 100644 --- a/drivers/target/target_core_alua.c +++ b/drivers/target/target_core_alua.c @@ -3,8 +3,9 @@ * * This file

Re: scsi target, likely GPL violation

2012-11-11 Thread James Bottomley
On Wed, 2012-11-07 at 08:50 -0800, Andy Grover wrote: Nick, Your company appears to be shipping kernel features in RTS OS that are not made available under the GPL, specifically support for the EXTENDED_COPY and COMPARE_AND_WRITE SCSI commands, in order to claim full Vmware vSphere 5 VAAI

Re: [PATCH] USB enclosures seem to require read(16) with 2TB drives

2012-11-11 Thread Stefan Richter
On Nov 09 Elliott, Robert (Server Storage) wrote: I recommend broadening this patch. T10 is discussing making READ (10), WRITE (10), etc. obsolete in SBC-4 in favor of their 16-byte CDB counterparts. The algorithm should be: 1. During discovery, determine if 16-byte CDBs are supported.

Re: scsi target, likely GPL violation

2012-11-11 Thread Theodore Ts'o
On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 09:34:16AM +, James Bottomley wrote: Anybody who does enforcement will tell you that you begin with first hand proof of a violation. That means obtain the product and make sure it's been modified and that a request for corresponding source fails. In this case,

Re: scsi target, likely GPL violation

2012-11-11 Thread Bradley M. Kuhn
On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 09:34:16AM +, James Bottomley wrote: Anybody who does enforcement will tell you that you begin with first hand proof of a violation. That means obtain the product and make sure it's been modified and that a request for corresponding source fails. I agree with

Re: scsi target, likely GPL violation

2012-11-11 Thread James Bottomley
On Sun, 2012-11-11 at 10:15 -0500, Bradley M. Kuhn wrote: James wrote: [I'd like to see] a genuine public apology for the libel... Because any further discussion of unsubstantiated allegations of this nature exposes us all to jeopardy of legal sanction. Hey that's a complete

Re: scsi target, likely GPL violation

2012-11-11 Thread Alan Cox
1. Yes, I've got first hand proof of a GPL violation (in which case we'll then move to seeing how we can remedy this) or 2. A genuine public apology for the libel, which I'll do my best to prevail on RTS to accept. Because any further discussion of

RE: scsi target, likely GPL violation

2012-11-11 Thread Lawrence Rosen
Alan Cox wrote: So either your work is truely not derivative of the kernel (which I find wildly improbable) or you have a problem and since you are aware of the complaints publically I guess probably a triple damages sized problem. But that's one for your lawyers and whatever opinion they

Re: scsi target, likely GPL violation

2012-11-11 Thread Julian Calaby
Hi Lawrence, On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 9:13 AM, Lawrence Rosen lro...@rosenlaw.com wrote: Alan Cox wrote: So either your work is truely not derivative of the kernel (which I find wildly improbable) or you have a problem and since you are aware of the complaints publically I guess probably a

Re: scsi target, likely GPL violation

2012-11-11 Thread Dave Airlie
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 8:41 AM, Julian Calaby julian.cal...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Lawrence, On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 9:13 AM, Lawrence Rosen lro...@rosenlaw.com wrote: Alan Cox wrote: So either your work is truely not derivative of the kernel (which I find wildly improbable) or you have a

Re: scsi target, likely GPL violation

2012-11-11 Thread Douglas Gilbert
On 12-11-11 04:34 AM, James Bottomley wrote: On Wed, 2012-11-07 at 08:50 -0800, Andy Grover wrote: Nick, Your company appears to be shipping kernel features in RTS OS that are not made available under the GPL, specifically support for the EXTENDED_COPY and COMPARE_AND_WRITE SCSI commands, in