lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Jul]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Direct access to hardware
Michael Poole wrote:
>
> James Sutherland <jas88@cam.ac.uk> writes:
>
> > On 25 Jul 2000, Michael Poole wrote:
> >
> > > Talking to the drive should be permitted under Linux or it should not;
> > > you shouldn't have to switch on some "firmware upgrade kernel" flag
> > > just to talk ATA extensions.
> >
> > It's not a case of talking "extensions", just a matter of preventing
> > access to the vendor-specific commands which potentially void the
> > warranty.
>
> Making vague claims about voiding warranties doesn't help the
> discussion. If the drive vendor wishes to forbid user firmware
> upgrades, they can simply make that available only through physical
> modification of the drive (which would void the warranty in itself).
> If they want the host CPU to update their firmware, they'd better be
> prepared for all that entails.

Take a look at motherboard warranties.
If you flash the BIOS with the tools
THEY provide and the BIOS files THEY
provide you assume the risks if it fails.
The warranty only covers the board AS IT
WAS SHIPPED, even if the BIOS is buggy.

Weather you use their BIOS files or files
from somewhere else, weather you use their
tools or tool from somewhere else, If
you try to flash the BIOS and it kills
the board, the warranty will NOT cover
the replacemet Flash chip with the
correct BIOS, and will never include the
shipping and installation fees that getting
the new chip on yiou board will add.

I know, I asked 4 different manufacturers
and 20 retailers/distributors about it.
This includes retail and OEM versions of
the boards.

-Thomas

-
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 13:57    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans