lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1998]   [Sep]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: Linux, UDI and SCO.
In <19980919234558.A32537@arbat.com> Erik Corry (erik@arbat.com) wrote:
EC> On Sun, Sep 20, 1998 at 01:45:30AM +0400, Khimenko Victor wrote:
>> In <19980919223003.A29904@arbat.com> Erik Corry (erik@arbat.com) wrote:
>> EC> On Sat, Sep 19, 1998 at 11:32:06PM +0400, Khimenko Victor wrote:
>> >> In <19980919203721.A25556@arbat.com> Erik Corry (erik@arbat.com) wrote:
>> >> EC> On Sat, Sep 19, 1998 at 10:31:26PM +0400, Khimenko Victor wrote:
>> >> >> In <19980919193105.A22160@arbat.com> Erik Corry (erik@arbat.com) wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> EC> But you can release a UDI driver simultaneously under two
>> >> >> EC> different licenses. So everyone can be happy.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Not at all. LGPL will be 100% enough for such purposes.
>> >>
>> >> EC> I see no way of forcing hardware manufacturers to use LGPL.
>> >>
>> >> Of course this is impossible. But if requirements for LGPL will be included
>> >> in "UDI certification" process then most (but of course not all) hardware
>> >> manufacturers will use LGPL.
>>
>> EC> Get real!
>>
>> I'm serious. ABSOLUTELY serious. UDI folks want help from Linux community,
>> right ?

EC> Not really. UDI can go ahead without the help of the Linux
EC> kernel developers. SCO are writing the UDI code for the
EC> kernel, and if it is not accepted then they can just ask
EC> vendors and users to patch the kernel themselves.

SCO is not needed UDI support for Linux at all :-) They need linux folks to
help them with drivers :-) Linux folks could help them but this help will be
clearly not unconditional. May be price, offered below is to much or to small
but IMO it's good starting point...

>> Linux community myst be paid! The only appropriate currency here is
>> source code. And I'm pretty sure that it's not possible: for example our
>> EtherJet Aptiva's uses GPL'ed drivers drom IBM for 1.5 years ! LONG before
>> IBM showed support for Linux at all... This driver is included in 2.1.1xx...
>> If manufacturer want produce binary-only UDI driver he is free to do so. But
>> this driver will not be certified :-)) That's all. Or UDI folks could take

EC> What makes you think they will care about certification? And
EC> you couldn't call it UDI certification, because UDI is cross-
EC> platform, so it can't include Linux-only requirements.

LGPL is NOT required for Linux. You could use binary-only driver with Linux
just now -- without UDI help. LGPL requirements for certification will be
pay for support of UDI by Linux community. May be it's to much -- UDI folks
could offer lesser price :-)) Auction is not over :-))

>> Linux source codes and do anything with them (not vialationg GPL copiright, of
>> course :-). WITHOUT help from Linux community. Linuxers are not communists.
>> This is meritocracy :-) We must be paid for our help :-) They could make two
>> certification types: OSS-certified and simple certified. No problem. But EACH
>> AND EVERY Joe Avarage must be warned about danger of binry-only drivers!

EC> Well we can do that, but we cannot force anyone to use
EC> the LGPL.

We could not. UDI folks could. If they want :-)) Of course even after this
any hardware manufacturer could make non-certified binary-only driver but
non-certified driver is definitely not "Good Thing" even for Joe Average...




-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:44    [W:0.088 / U:0.240 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site