PDA

View Full Version : newspeak in menuconfig.



Ptero-4
March 20th, 2006, 06:23 AM
Hi. I compiled a kernel some time ago on my Xubuntu partition in my "eBuntu". And I saw something in the menuconfig utility that kinda creept me out, somewhere in the menuconfig utility there's an option to compile support for TPM's (Trusted Platform modules, I made another thread about it earlier), and when I looked at that option's description I realized that the description talked about "security device" support in the same way M$, RIAA, MPAA, etc talks about this topic. I kinda freaked out b/c that misleading definition of "security devices" is bound to be found in M$ and their friends, but I never expected to see such deceiving message in a GNU, OSS utility. And I wanted to know. Why it is there? and have anyone of you seen similar M$esque misleading messagery on menuconfig or any other GNU app?

Ptero-4
March 22nd, 2006, 09:10 PM
Has anybody here compiled a f*ckin kernel. 'Cause what I'm talkin about is the frea*** ncurses util that you see when you compile a kernel.

tageiru
March 22nd, 2006, 09:19 PM
Why it is there?
It is an open source driver for a piece of hardware, thats why it is there. If you have no need for it, dont use it.

Stormy Eyes
March 22nd, 2006, 09:20 PM
Has anybody here compiled a f*ckin kernel. 'Cause what I'm talkin about is the frea*** ncurses util that you see when you compile a kernel.

Yes, I've compiled the kernel. Yes, I know that Linus allows DRM support in the kernel; I think it's why the kernel will still be distributed under version 2 of the GPL, since v3 forbids DRM support. If you don't want DRM support in your kernel, don't compile it. What's the big f---ing deal?

Ptero-4
March 23rd, 2006, 09:17 PM
Tageiru and Stormy. I know it's an OSS tool, and my problem isn't that option, is it's descriptive text. What I meant to ask is Why the description message for that option is written in the way M$ would write such options to keep ppl ignorant (Support for security devices) and not in the clarifying way we would do it (Support for hardware restrictions management).

Brunellus
March 23rd, 2006, 09:59 PM
...so talk to the relevant maintainers and/or hurl bombs in their direction.

The sort of person who is compiling a kernel is not likely to be the sort of person who is as ignorant as you believe all of us to be.

briancurtin
March 24th, 2006, 05:49 AM
Has anybody here compiled a f*ckin kernel. 'Cause what I'm talkin about is the frea*** ncurses util that you see when you compile a kernel.
calm down.

GeneralZod
March 24th, 2006, 09:38 AM
This is roughly similar to complaining that a kitchen knife is not advertised as a "Human Stabbing Weapon". The TPM is a security device - it's hardware can be conscripted to keep your data private even if, say, someone has physical access to your machine. The fact that, like a kitchen knife, it can be used for nefarious purposes is irrelevant, and it would be unprofessional of the maintainer to write some political screed in the description.

tageiru
March 24th, 2006, 02:10 PM
Tageiru and Stormy. I know it's an OSS tool, and my problem isn't that option, is it's descriptive text. What I meant to ask is Why the description message for that option is written in the way M$ would write such options to keep ppl ignorant (Support for security devices) and not in the clarifying way we would do it (Support for hardware restrictions management).
Well the intended use of the device is to increase the security and integrity of a system, so what else would they call it?