[lkml]   [2002]   [Feb]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Kernel module ethics.
On Thu, 28 Feb 2002, Helge Hafting wrote:
[much snipped]
> Generally, the more open the better. Keep in mind that buying
> hw that needs a closed-source driver is something we do _only_ when
> no competing product with a GPL driver exist. Your competitors
> might go the GPL way even if you don't. Many users of closed drivers
> do so because they converted a machine from windows to linux.
> If they buy specifically for linux, they buy something well-supported.
> And the ideal then is a driver in the official tree. The second
> best is a open source driver that might get into the tree - it just
> hasn't happened yet. A closed driver at least initiates a web search
> for other harware...

I want to underscore this. I don't buy hardware until I know that it's
possible to *keep* it running with Linux. If the driver is closed-source,
I'll buy something else or do without. Secret magic firmware would be
grudgingly accepted, but only if there isn't a comparable product with no

Mark H. Wood, Lead System Programmer mwood@IUPUI.Edu
Our lives are forever changed. But *that* is exactly as it always was.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:20    [W:0.105 / U:2.344 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site