On Tue, 31 Mar 2015 07:51:19 +0100
KatolaZ <katolaz@???> wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 04:56:00PM -0500, Nate Bargmann wrote:

> > Of course, the next step is an "authorized" and signed kernel
> > distributed only in binary form that can be "trusted" on Win10
> > certified hardware. Add to that scenario that some future version
> > of systemd will only work with the signed and "trusted" binary only
> > kernel...
> >
>
> Again. such a binary blob cannot be the Linux kernel with some
> patches, thanks to the fact that Linux is under GPLv2, so any modified
> version of it has to be released with the same license, which implies
> that any user should be able to use, distribute, modify and
> redistribute the software she receives under that license.

I think he was probably envisioning Redhat creating a from-scratch
kernel. This would further differentiate Redhat, and would lock their
users into Redhat. I think Nate's point is Redhat's scared to do that
until Redhat has everyone ensnared in their hard-to-remove obfuscation
code (otherwise known as systemd).

Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean Redhat isn't out to get me.

SteveT

Steve Litt                *  http://www.troubleshooters.com/
Troubleshooting Training  *  Human Performance