From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S268511AbUHYHhK (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Aug 2004 03:37:10 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S268515AbUHYHhK (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Aug 2004 03:37:10 -0400 Received: from hermine.aitel.hist.no ([158.38.50.15]:40718 "HELO hermine.aitel.hist.no") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S268511AbUHYHhE (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Aug 2004 03:37:04 -0400 Message-ID: <412C4295.1000700@hist.no> Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 09:41:09 +0200 From: Helge Hafting User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.1 (X11/20040715) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "David N. Welton" CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Linux Incompatibility List References: <87r7q0th2n.fsf@dedasys.com> In-Reply-To: <87r7q0th2n.fsf@dedasys.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org David N. Welton wrote: >Hi, > >I'm reviving an idea I implemented several years ago, namely the Linux >Incompatibility List. > >The idea is simple: most hardware works fine with Linux, and the >situation is generally pretty good, with Linux increasingly showing up >on the corporate radar. > >However, there are devices that don't work with Linux, for various >reasons (no specs, too new and no one has written a driver, etc...), >and it's easier to keep track of those devices so that people can >avoid them (or the hero types can write drivers for them). > [...] >I think (correct me if I'm wrong) the information we would want to >collect is: > >Product Name: > >Manufacturer: > >Model Number: > >Chipset: > >How bad it is (1 to 10, 9 being it almost works and has only minor >bugs): > >Reason (no specs, driver still being worked on, ...): > >Url for more info: > >An email address of yours that we may publish (so that we can contact >you if someone says "no, that works just fine!"): > >Notes: > >Ideas/comments/suggestions are welcome at this stage. > > > An idea: To really put some pressure on vendors, also have an entry for "alternate/better solution" where people can list a way to achieve the same result with someone else's product and open drivers. Example: Product: Matrox parhelia (a triplehead graphichs card) Reason: Bad binary-only 2D-only driver Alternate solution: Achieve triplehead with two radeon cards (1 AGP dualhead + 1 PCI) instead! This will be useful for anyone planning a upgrade but finding their favourite solution on the incompatibility list. And it'll sure put some pressure on the manufacturer to at least get a _good_ driver out (changing the reason), or even better, an open one which get rid of the incompatibility entry. Helge Hafting