Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 1 Sep 1998 22:27:06 -0700 (PDT) | From | Gerhard Mack <> | Subject | Re: Legal Issues with UDI ( was Re: [Fwd: Uniform Driver Interface (UDI)] ) |
| |
On Tue, 1 Sep 1998, Terry L Ridder wrote:
> Gerhard Mack wrote: > > > > The thing with it would be that we don't have to distribute them with the > > kernel. > > While this may be true this could take us down the slippery slope of > Motif, Qt, etc. Somehow I can not imagine an end-user downloading Linux > only to discover that they need a UDI driver in order to even boot > the system, which is available in binary format only, and cost actual > money.
Any hardware maker fool enough to charge for drivers will end up getting exactly what they deserve. (a lot of returned product)
> > Can you run proprietary programs on gpl operating systems? > > Running proprietary programs is a totally different issue. > The point being discussed is concerning UDI device drivers. > > A bug in something like Applixware, WordPrefect, etc for Linux > does not directly affect the ability to run Linux. A bug in a binary > format > only UDI device driver would.
But then it's no longer a Linux issue, the driver will fail on the other operating systems as well, the blame will fall in the manufacturer where it would belong.
Just a note: I am not ever wanting to see Linux drivers replaced with UDI, native drivers are always preferable, at least this way the hardware will work. It will then be a means of x card maker is faster then y because y is too lame to release the specs, instead of people asking why we don't support their favorite device.
Gerhard
[snip]
-- Gerhard Mack irc-admin skyline.starchat.net
gmack@imag.net InnerFIRE@starchat.net
As a computer I find your faith in technology amusing.
- 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.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html
| |