Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+willy=40w.ods.org@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id <S267610AbTAGTS2>; Tue, 7 Jan 2003 14:18:28 -0500
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org
	id <S267611AbTAGTS2>; Tue, 7 Jan 2003 14:18:28 -0500
Received: from tmr-02.dsl.thebiz.net ([216.238.38.204]:28933 "EHLO
	gatekeeper.tmr.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id <S267610AbTAGTS1>; Tue, 7 Jan 2003 14:18:27 -0500
Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 14:24:34 -0500 (EST)
From: Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
To: Jesse Pollard <pollard@admin.navo.hpc.mil>
cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Honest does not pay here ...
In-Reply-To: <200301071233.49252.pollard@admin.navo.hpc.mil>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.96.1030107141548.16792A-100000@gatekeeper.tmr.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2242
Lines: 48

On Tue, 7 Jan 2003, Jesse Pollard wrote:

> On Tuesday 07 January 2003 10:32 am, Bill Davidsen wrote:

> > For Linux, there are not only dozens of kernel versions around, but the
> > uni and smp versions are not the same. Vendors who want to provide drivers
> > really want to provide the binary even if the module is open source, just
> > because the average person has no desire to build any part of a kernel.

> > Try to understand why vendors want to ship binary modules and why they
> > don't always work before making accusations.
> 
> Been there (though it wasn't within the last 20 years). The only justification
> for not releasing the specifications is incompetent hardware design worked
> around by software. Releasing the software would reveal how incompetent
> some designers are.
> 
> > All that said, an independent testing service would be of use to the
> > vendors, because they could find things before shipping and have someone
> > to share the blame if the module didn't work with another kernel.
> 
> Releasing the source would save more money than the testing service costs.
> Besides, I'm not buying a driver - I only want the device, and the specs on 
> the device that may allow me or someone else to create a driver for Linux
> or some other purpose (ie - a dedicated, embeded system not necessarily based
> on Linux)...
> 
> Personally, I view binary only drivers as evidence of incompetence, or
> embarassement over how poor a design is in the first place...

Either you didn't read or didn't understand the points I was making that
even if the driver is open source the vendors still have good reasons to
release a binary module with the hardware.

I'm sorry I don't know how to state it more clearly than I did the first
time, it has zero to do with open source or not, and all to do with what
the majority of users are capable of installing.

-- 
bill davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
  CTO, TMR Associates, Inc
Doing interesting things with little computers since 1979.

-
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/