From: Benjamin Bach <benjamin@overtag.dk>
To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Idea: Automatic binary driver compiling system
Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2006 11:47:54 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <441D36DA.2000701@overtag.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1142698292.2889.26.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org>
Wow, kudos to your work with the consequences of binary drivers. I
certainly do not wish to add any redundant remarks of trolling sentences
to this discussion. I've read +50 posts about binary drivers on this
mailing list and in conclusion to that, I'd like to only add the following:
My idea was not to compromise the structure of the kernel. Nothing
should be changed here. I also see a very notable resistance to binary
drivers from distributions. Looking at the way ATI and NVidia drivers
are treated by Fedora, SUSE and Ubuntu, I actually think they too have
an agenda on this matter, and somehow it resembles their agenda on
av-codecs. It's a sneaky-sneaky thing - if the user doesn't know a
binary driver exists, we won't tell him. FC5 recently released made this
huge "oops... we banned non-GPL modules in the kernel".
Anyways, I'm very happy with the combination of intelligence and
idealism on this list, and suddenly I feel more attracted to writing a
driver instead. For my Rio Karma mp3 player. It's a USB thing.. should
be do-able in 3 months even though I've never written a driver.
Cheers everybody, and thanks for sharing! =)
/ Benjamin
Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Sat, 2006-03-18 at 16:53 +0100, Benjamin Bach wrote:
>
>> Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>>
>>> there are over a thousand open source drivers, and at most a handful
>>> binary ones. Please go do your math.
>>>
>>>
>> You're doing the wrong comparison. How many drivers are missing
>>
>
> not too many. This is largely because hardware interfaces are getting
> increasingly standardized (it's cheaper for the hw vendors to not have
> to create a new driver for Windows XP)
>
>
>> or
>> lacking in ability?
>>
>
> some. But the vast majority is "good enough" by any standard.
>
>
>> And if you add to your handful of binary drivers
>> those thousands that exist for xp...
>>
>
> then it's clear that linux is better off ;)
> (and yes while XP has more drivers, in linux a driver would generally
> drive the hardware that in the windows world uses 10 to 20 drivers)
>
>
>> well, numbers do change. Also, most open source drivers aren't made by
>> the vendors themselves.
>>
>
> and? For standard interfaces... no big deal.
> And for non-standard interfaces.. it's increasingly done with the vendor
> help
>
>
>> We're doing subjective math here. It doesn't change the fact that Linux
>> would be better off with improved hardware support, right?
>>
>
> yes. But "more binary drivers" is absolutely not "better off"; but
> that's going towards the usual bimonthly troll topic so lets not go
> there and stop here.
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-03-19 10:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-03-17 18:00 Idea: Automatic binary driver compiling system Benjamin Bach
2006-03-17 17:49 ` Christoph Lameter
2006-03-17 18:35 ` Lee Revell
2006-03-18 15:03 ` Benjamin Bach
2006-03-18 15:10 ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-03-18 15:53 ` Benjamin Bach
2006-03-18 16:11 ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-03-19 10:47 ` Benjamin Bach [this message]
2006-03-19 11:54 ` Jesper Juhl
2006-03-19 15:19 ` Bob Copeland
2006-03-19 16:12 ` Benjamin Bach
2006-03-20 11:43 ` Denis Vlasenko
2006-03-20 15:46 ` Bob Copeland
2006-03-21 23:02 ` Lee Revell
2006-03-22 21:51 ` Pavel Machek
2006-03-18 16:12 ` Jesper Juhl
2006-03-18 16:51 ` Adrian Bunk
2006-03-19 16:30 ` Sander
2006-03-19 18:02 ` Nix
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=441D36DA.2000701@overtag.dk \
--to=benjamin@overtag.dk \
--cc=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.