Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261752AbUDXUEN (ORCPT ); Sat, 24 Apr 2004 16:04:13 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262224AbUDXUEN (ORCPT ); Sat, 24 Apr 2004 16:04:13 -0400 Received: from pop.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:43448 "HELO mail.gmx.net") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S261752AbUDXUEH (ORCPT ); Sat, 24 Apr 2004 16:04:07 -0400 X-Authenticated: #20450766 Date: Sat, 24 Apr 2004 22:00:10 +0200 (CEST) From: Guennadi Liakhovetski To: "Ihar 'Philips' Filipau" cc: Guennadi Liakhovetski , Linux Kernel ML Subject: Re: [somewhat OT] binary modules agaaaain In-Reply-To: <408A3B82.5020807@softhome.net> Message-ID: 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: 2552 Lines: 64 On Sat, 24 Apr 2004, Ihar 'Philips' Filipau wrote: > Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote: > > Hello all > > > > I came across an idea, how Linux could allow binary modules, still having > > reasonable control over them. > > > > I am not advocating for binary modules, nor I am trying to make their life > > harder, this is just an idea how it could be done. > > > > I'll try to make it short, details may be discussed later, if any interest > > arises. > > > > A binary module is "considered good" if > > I belive that you forgot to make "The Point." May be... > And "discussion" (good vs. bad isn't discussion, but flames) went in > wrong direction. Very right. Let me try to explain it again. It was just an idea, that popped in my mind. I was not sure if it was good or bad, so, I decided to dump it to lkml, so, that the people here could evaluate it. And, if it can be of any use - use it. I, personally, don't care much (at least at the moment) about binary drivers. And I most of all wanted to avoid starting a new wave of flames. That's why I tried to avoid answering to other posters (sorry, if it was somewhat impolite). > Be constructive. For example: Let's aks h/w producers making at least > glue layer open source (bsd or something), so people eventually might > help to maintain this glue layer. > How it can help? - producer with time may move bigger parts of driver > into open source domains. > How it can gets screwed? - producer might just start liking when > someone is doing his work for him. Some license a-la GPL to not let glue > layer to slip into binary only domain back must be in place. > > This could be a good starting point for h/w producers and linux > comunity as a whole. > > Saying Good/Bad is just B.S. - helps no-one. > Building bridges between comunity and producers - might improve and > deepen relationships. And that's what I hope for. Thanks! You seem to have understood the idea pretty close to what I mean, and, probably, you are better capable of explaining things, than I:-) But, I think, if it is going to be discussed further, let's move it away from LKML (you are right, Bart). It can either be discussed in private emails, or, maybe someone could create a dedicated mailing list somewhere. Thanks Guennadi --- Guennadi Liakhovetski - 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/