Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753456AbWLOWBT (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Dec 2006 17:01:19 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753524AbWLOWBT (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Dec 2006 17:01:19 -0500 Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com ([64.233.182.186]:42753 "EHLO nf-out-0910.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753456AbWLOWBS (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Dec 2006 17:01:18 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version:content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=EYd23xH7NHpDsgeMQCcq7XkQwvrqaLqVkGz+ssfBjoBEugsaG0ZlIJRM6w/RcNIqztB5hqMdazccrmQ1gziBDpmmhafOMGXm9e3Q71h6ldrFpM/ku41wd6XUYeB7lFcoxdtLBIAzUfdZIueV9Alhd+kkh2hgsav3l0XXMCzgvHg= Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2006 01:01:17 +0300 From: Alexey Dobriyan To: James Porter Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Binary Drivers Message-ID: <20061215220117.GA24819@martell.zuzino.mipt.ru> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2491 Lines: 72 On Fri, Dec 15, 2006 at 09:20:58PM +0000, James Porter wrote: > I think some kernel developers take to much responsibility, is there a bug in a > binary driver? Send it upstream and explain to the user that it's a closed > source driver and is up to said company to fix it. > > For what it's worth, I don't see any problem with binary drivers from hardware > manufacturers. Binary drivers from hardware manufacturers are crap. Learn it by heart. > Just because nvidia makes a closed source driver doesn't mean that we can't also > create an open source driver(limited functionality, reverse engineered, > etc.,etc.). We can. > I firmly believe that the choice should be up to the user and/or > distro. I'm not a kernel dev, I don't know c... but you can't. > but I understand the concepts and > I should have the right to do what I want with this GPL code. You don't have a right to do what you want with GNU GPL'ed code. Read the fucking license, already. > Restricting me only frustrates me. Nobody is restricting you. > Should the default be open source, definitely; should binary > drivers be blocked from running on a linux kernel...certainly not. But users of binary drivers should be blocked from sending bug reports to kernel developers. > I personally like nvidia's products, they have spent a lot of money in R&D. One > example is SLI, if their spec was open what would stop ATI from stealing their > work(patents?, gotta love those). I lost a nice quote about 10-20% of the community stopping making excuses for vendors. Sad, sad, nice quote definitely. > Personally I think nvidia has excellent > support for linux, I have actually convinced people to use linux(desktop and > server) just by showing them beryl with the nvidia beta drivers. beryl on server? > Lastly I think it's ridiculous to create,diplay, and distribute "Free" as in > freedom and "Free" as in cost software only to later consider limiting my > freedom... Nobody is limiting you. > want to know why a lot of large companies don't support > linux...exactly threads like this. You asked them? > Why make the effort to use "Free" software > only to have the rug pulled out from under you. This is what makes the BSDs so > attractive. So use BSD. - 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/