From: Benjamin Bach <benjamin@overtag.dk>
To: Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Idea: Automatic binary driver compiling system
Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2006 16:03:22 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <441C213A.3000404@overtag.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1142620509.25258.53.camel@mindpipe>
Lee Revell wrote:
> Then let's end the thread here because this is the crux of ther issue -
> no one WANTS it to be easier for vendors to ship binary drivers.
>
> Linux will not change to accomodate vendors desire for binary drivers.
> The vendors must adapt to Linux. End of story.
>
I see two pictures:
1) Open source does not accommodate binary drivers. In that way hardware
support is weakened but an increasing number of companies should adopt
open source drivers because demand increases even without super-duper
hardware support.
2) Open source does in fact accommodate binary drivers because some
idiot (me) just took the liberty of starting this project just to see
what happens. It's exactly the same as when some people go and fork a
project and everybody says it'll weaken the movement. But something
could happen: It could be beneficial! Linux get's better hardware
support, more people adopt it and business begins to realize that maybe
they should try to co-operate a bit more software-wise. That's what we
all want them to do, yes?
As of now Linux won't force vendors into creating open source drivers.
That'd be like a small dog barking.
I here every word when people talk about the benefits of open source
drivers. But really, think: If all these benefits why isn't there
anymore open source drivers? And the answer is not "because companies
are stupid". If we can't make it attractive enough to release driver
source code then maybe the world just isn't matured yet. And we'll wait.
But while waiting I want my 3d card to perform better and my mp3-player
to work.
...
Bugga, here we went and turned it into opinions =)
/ Benjamin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-03-18 15:03 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 [this message]
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
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=441C213A.3000404@overtag.dk \
--to=benjamin@overtag.dk \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rlrevell@joe-job.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox