Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: GPL vs non-GPL device drivers | From | Bernd Petrovitsch <> | Date | Fri, 16 Feb 2007 10:25:57 +0100 |
| |
On Fri, 2007-02-16 at 03:19 -0500, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote: [...] > Actually, the *real* reason embedded systems end up using old versions is > much simpler.
ACK.
> They start developing their code on release 2.X.Y, and they keep their code > out-of-tree. Then, when they come up for air, and it's at 2.X.(Y+15), they > discover that we weren't kidding when we shipped stable_api_nonsense.txt, > and since their code isn't in the tree, they have to do all the API cleanup > themselves, because no flock of nit-picking kernel janitor monkeys swarmed > over their code and magically fixed it up for them.
Actually it is questionable for product development in a commercial environment (especially in the embedded world where you usually have a quite defined hardware and software on your device) if one actually wants that - think of the "if it's not broken, don't fix it" reason.
> And unless Y+15 has some *very* compelling reasons to move forward, just > sticking at Y suddenly starts looking very good, because watching somebody > else's kernel janitor monkeys fix your code is fairly cheap, but paying your > own kernel janitor monkeys gets expensive really fast....
It depends on the *very* compelling reason if it is easier/cheaper to a) fix the problem in the "old" kernel, b) backport something or c) forward port the own drivers/changes. And that decision depends on lots of factors (and company-internal bureaucracy with the QA department may not be the least important).
Bernd -- Firmix Software GmbH http://www.firmix.at/ mobil: +43 664 4416156 fax: +43 1 7890849-55 Embedded Linux Development and Services
- 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/
| |