Subject: Re: Can't use SYSFS for "Proprietry" driver modules !!!.
From: Aaron Gyes <floam@sh.nu>
To: Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>
Cc: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <gilbertd@treblig.org>,
       Kyle Moffett <mrmacman_g4@mac.com>,
       Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
In-Reply-To: <20050327183522.GM4285@stusta.de>
References: <1111886147.1495.3.camel@localhost>
	 <490243b66dc7c3f592df7a7d0769dcb7@mac.com>
	 <1111913399.6297.28.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org>
	 <16d78e9ea33380a1f1ad90c454fb6e1d@mac.com>
	 <20050327180417.GD3815@gallifrey>  <20050327183522.GM4285@stusta.de>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 11:16:54 -0800
Message-Id: <1111951014.9831.4.camel@localhost>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1111
Lines: 23

> And then the user want to upgrade the 2.0 kernel that shipped with this 
> box although the company that made the hardware went bankrupt some years 
> ago.
> 
> If the user has the source of the driver, he can port the driver or hire 
> someone to port the driver (this "obscure piece of hardware" might also 
> be an expensive piece of hardware).

So what? Sure, GPL'd drivers are easier for an end-user in that case.
What does that have to do with law? What about what's better for the
company that made the device? Should NVIDIA be forced to give up their
secrets to all their competitors because some over zealous developers
say so? Should the end-users of the current drivers be forced to lose
out on features such as sysfs and udev compatability?

I love Linux, and a I love that free software has become mildly
successful, but the zealots are hurting both.

-
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/