>>79492216
>( silence is consent)
And that's all we hear from the FSF, SFConservancy, Linus, LKML, etc: because they DO agree (effectivly) with Grsecurity.

As Bradly Spengler identified:
> https://twitter.com/spendergrsec/status/1293155787859206146
>Importantly, neither the FSF nor the SFC, nor in fact any actual lawyer agrees with this bizarre claim from an anonymous troll. More info about the source of the claim can be found here: https://grsecurity.net/setting_the_record_straight_on_oss_v_perens_part1
> Thanks for doing your part, "Dr" to continue the troll's harrassment

>>LOL. " #GRSecurity violates both the Linux kernel's copyright and the #GCC #copyright by forbidding redistribution of the patches (in their Access Agreement): which are non-seperable derivative works...

To point out Grsecurity is violating a clause in the GPL, THE CENTRAL CLAUSE (share and share alike): is to be a mysoginist, woman-hating, girl loving, pedo.

So the FSF, SFConservancy, and LKML don't "go" there.