From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: code signing with foreign function interface? Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2010 03:06:09 +0900 Message-ID: <87bpf0t3am.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> References: <87y6i4xg7y.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1267984573 18834 80.91.229.12 (7 Mar 2010 17:56:13 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2010 17:56:13 +0000 (UTC) Cc: David Kastrup , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: joakim@verona.se Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Mar 07 18:56:08 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NoKhx-00008b-Cw for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 07 Mar 2010 18:56:05 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:34949 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NoKhw-0001Zc-W9 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 07 Mar 2010 12:56:05 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NoKhr-0001Vx-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 07 Mar 2010 12:55:59 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=57297 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NoKho-0001RH-GQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 07 Mar 2010 12:55:58 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NoKho-00059S-1Q for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 07 Mar 2010 12:55:56 -0500 Original-Received: from mtps02.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp ([130.158.97.224]:47108) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NoKhf-00058M-43; Sun, 07 Mar 2010 12:55:47 -0500 Original-Received: from uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp [130.158.99.156]) by mtps02.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 625D0820D; Mon, 8 Mar 2010 02:55:42 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: by uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix, from userid 1000) id B45841A382A; Mon, 8 Mar 2010 03:06:09 +0900 (JST) In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: VM 8.0.12-devo-585 under 21.5 (beta29) "garbanzo" a03421eb562b XEmacs Lucid (x86_64-unknown-linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:121709 Archived-At: joakim@verona.se writes: > - Emacs FFI loads the dll and checks that the desired licensed text in > binary form is present, and then proceeds to use the dll. If the text > is not present, refuse to proceed. I don't understand what you hope to accomplish with this. On the one side, I don't see how this prevents infringing binary distributions. One who is violating the GPL anyway is unlikely to deliberately *remove* the key which will surely be present in the sample module he derives his code from. On the other, it will interfere with private use of DLLs without the key, which (a) is not restricted at all by the GPL, and (b) is very likely quite legitimate in the case of older GPLed or LGPLed DLLs (ie, all that exist today). And if you're serious about a true FFI that can be called from Lisp, the situation is even worse: very likely the user wishes to call routines from a library which doesn't know or care that Emacs exists. So I don't see how it addresses the objections to the use of DLLs and/or FFI, while noticeably restricting the exercise of rights granted under the GPL.