Re: ipw3945 status

Kasper Sandberg
2006-07-30T13:01:25Z

On Sun, 2006-07-30 at 12:47 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 30, 2006 at 01:34:19PM +0200, Jan Dittmer wrote:
>
> > Why not get rid of the daemon like bsd did [0]? Otherwise in
> > 5 years you'll have 42 daemons running which communicate with
> > the firmware of various devices, each having a different inter-
> > face.
>
> Because it would involve a moderate rewriting of the driver, and we'd
> have to carry a delta against Intel's code forever.
without knowing this for sure, dont you think that if a largely changed
version of the driver appeared in the tree, intel may start developing
on that? cause then they wouldnt be the ones that "broke" compliance
with FCC(hah) by not doing binaryonly.
>