Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Thu, 28 Feb 2002 11:04:39 -0500 (EST) | From | "Mark H. Wood" <> | Subject | Re: 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 secrets.
-- 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 majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |