linux-kernel - Re: ipw3945 status

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <1154264478.13635.22.camel@localhost>
Date:	Sun, 30 Jul 2006 15:01:17 +0200
From:	Kasper Sandberg <lkml@...anurb.dk>
To:	Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>
Cc:	Jan Dittmer <jdi@....org>, Pavel Machek <pavel@...e.cz>,
	Jirka Lenost Benc <jbenc@...e.cz>,
	kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	ipw2100-admin@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: ipw3945 status

On Sun, 2006-07-30 at 12:47 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 30, 2006 at 01:34:19PM +0200, Jan Dittmer wrote:
> 
> > Why not get rid of the daemon like bsd did [0]? Otherwise in
> > 5 years you'll have 42 daemons running which communicate with
> > the firmware of various devices, each having a different inter-
> > face.
> 
> Because it would involve a moderate rewriting of the driver, and we'd 
> have to carry a delta against Intel's code forever.
without knowing this for sure, dont you think that if a largely changed
version of the driver appeared in the tree, intel may start developing
on that? cause then they wouldnt be the ones that "broke" compliance
with FCC(hah) by not doing binaryonly.
> 

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/