| |||||||||||
RPM and deb package signingRPM and deb package signingPosted May 1, 2003 11:09 UTC (Thu) by rasumner (guest, #5410)Parent article: The Linux kernel and digital rights management If some lawyer were to decide that putting DRM in the kernel would be a violation of the GPL, then I don't see how at the same time you could permit RedHat (and most other distributors) signing the packages that they distribute. I can modify the sources from a RPM received from RedHat and recompile it, but I can't sign it with their key. The difference that I see is that RedHat's tools allow the end user to configure which keys they trust. While that is a significant difference, that isn't really part of the legal question being asked. Changing the keys lets me recreate a package which is in some way equivalent, but it will never be the same as if signed by RedHat's key.
(Log in to post comments)
RPM and deb package signing Posted May 1, 2003 15:45 UTC (Thu) by proski (subscriber, #104) [Link] I think nobody is saying that "putting DRM in the kernel would be a violation of the GPL". It's a strawman argument. And by the way, there is a world of difference between mandatory and optional signatures.
|
|||||||||||