From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030210AbWHCTKk (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Aug 2006 15:10:40 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030211AbWHCTKk (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Aug 2006 15:10:40 -0400 Received: from ns1.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:40329 "EHLO mx1.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030210AbWHCTKj (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Aug 2006 15:10:39 -0400 Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2006 12:06:05 -0700 From: Greg KH To: Zachary Amsden Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , Christoph Hellwig , Rusty Russell , Jack Lo Subject: Re: A proposal - binary Message-ID: <20060803190605.GB14237@kroah.com> References: <44D1CC7D.4010600@vmware.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <44D1CC7D.4010600@vmware.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.12-2006-07-14 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 03:14:21AM -0700, Zachary Amsden wrote: > I would like to propose an interface for linking a GPL kernel, > specifically, Linux, against binary blobs. Sorry, but we aren't lawyers here, we are programmers. Do you have a patch that shows what you are trying to describe here? Care to post it? How does this differ with the way that the Xen developers are proposing? Why haven't you worked with them to find a solution that everyone likes? And what about Rusty's proposal that is supposed to be the "middle ground" between the two competing camps? How does this differ from that? Why don't you like Rusty's proposal? Please, start posting code and work together with the other people that are wanting to achive the same end goal as you are. That is what really matters here. thanks, greg k-h