ntfs kernel module

[Alexandre Oliva]

On Oct 26, 2004, Dan Hollis <goemon at anime.net> wrote:

> On 26 Oct 2004, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> On Oct 26, 2004, Dan Hollis <goemon at anime.net> wrote:
>> > The excuses for not including ntfs have varied over the years, always 
>> > changing. The decision not to include ntfs-readonly is an ideological 
>> > issue and not a technical or legal one.
>> If you're so sure there isn't a legal issue, I'm sure you wouldn't
>> mind signing an agreement with Red Hat, becoming personally
>> responsible for any liability resulting from shipping a kernel with
>> the NTFS module enabled, right?

> are there such agreements for fat and rdp and samba, which microsoft 
> stated they did hold patents on?

I'm sure Red Hat wouldn't mind if you included them all in the
agreement :-)

-- 
Alexandre Oliva             http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer   aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist  oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}