lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1998]   [Sep]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: Linux, UDI and SCO.

    In article <ABDFz0suqH@khim.mccme.ru> you wrote:

    > But Terry still wrong. There are is GPL and even more important there is
    > additional Linus clause about possibility of binary drivers for Linux.
    > So we have three choices for UDI drivers:
    > 1. GNU GPL'ed UDI drivers or similar. Linux community are happy. [Some] Unix
    > vendors are unhappy. [Some] hardware manufacturers are unhappy.
    > 2. GNU LGPL'ed UDI drivers or similar. Linux community are content. Unix
    > vendors are content. [Some] hardware manufacturers are unhappy.
    > 3. Closed-Source UDI drivers. Linux community is unhappy. [Some] Unix
    > verndors are content, some are unhappy. Hardware manufacturers are
    > happy.

    But you can release a UDI driver simultaneously under two
    different licenses. So everyone can be happy.

    I think it is in the hardware manufacturers interest to
    release their UDI driver under the GPL or the XFree86
    license because.

    1) It costs them nothing. 2) It gets taken up in the
    standard kernel, which reduces the work for them.
    3) It means they can sell to non-x86 (and later non-Merced)
    Linux users
    4) Someone might use the UDI driver to make a native Linux
    driver which is almost certain to have better
    performance.
    5) It makes them look good. 6) Non-Linux Non-mainstream
    OSs can use it too, without having to bother the
    hardware manufacturer for a precompiled version (if
    they use GPL then this applies to individual users of
    the other OS, if they use XFree86 licensing the driver
    can go into the standard distribution of ARM-OpenBSD
    or whatever.
    7) People who insist on source for security reasons
    or other reasons can use the hardware too.
    8) People will send them bug fixes, which they can use for
    non-source UDI platforms
    9) Users who want to be able to file bug reports to Red Hat
    etc. and the kernel list will be able to use their
    hardware. I would imagine that the kernel developers
    will not want to waste their time trying to debug
    kernels that contain non-source UDI drivers.

    If the hardware manufacturer doesn't see this then we
    can recommend users not to buy from them like we do now.
    I don't believe in the doomsday scenarios, on the contrary
    I think this could usher in a new age, where drivers for
    new hardware are available immediately instead of several
    months later. It is often a frustrating experience
    loading Linux on a brand new machine, because being
    brand new it has new hardware, where the drivers are
    untested or unavailable. Three months later it is easy
    but people don't generally buy three month old machines.
    That turnaround time could improve dramatically.

    --
    There's really no way to fix this, and still keep Perl pathologically eclectic
    --
    Erik Corry erik@arbat.com Ceterum censeo, Microsoftem esse delendam!

    -
    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:0.024 / U:33.940 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site