[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0612171201540.27120@pademelon.sonytel.be>
Date: Sun, 17 Dec 2006 12:04:56 +0100 (CET)
From: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
To: Gene Heskett <gene.heskett@...izon.net>
cc: Linux Kernel Development <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: GPL only modules [was Re: [GIT PATCH] more Driver core patches
for 2.6.19]
On Sat, 16 Dec 2006, Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Saturday 16 December 2006 05:28, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >On Saturday, 16 December 2006 07:43, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> [...]
> >I think the most important problem with the binary-only drivers is that
> > we can't support their users _at_ _all_, but some of them expect us to
> > support them somehow.
> >
> >So, why don't we make an official statement, like something that will
> > appear on the front page of www.kernel.org, that the users of
> > binary-only drivers will never get any support from us? That would
> > make things crystal clear.
>
> I disagree with this, to the extent that I perceive this business of no
> support for a 'tainted' kernel to be almost in the same category as
> saying that if we configure and build our own kernels, then we are alone
> and you don't want to hear about it.
>
> Yes, there is a rather large difference in actual fact, but if I come to
There's indeed a big difference. That's why people ask for your .config and for
the changes you made to your kernel (especially in cases like `Hi, the kernel
crashes with my newly written driver').
> the list with a firewire or usb problem, we should be capable of
> divorcing the fact that I may also be using an ati or nvidia supplied
> driver from the firewire or usb problem at hand.
You can divorce it by not loading the binary-only driver(s) and reproducing the
problem.
> I am not in fact using the ati driver with my 9200SE, as the in-kernel as
> its plenty good enough for that I do, but that's the point. To
> automaticly deny supplying what might be helpfull suggestions just
> because the user has a 'tainted' kernel strikes me as being pretty darned
> hypocritical, particularly when the user states he has reverted but this
> instant problem persists.
Then the kernel is no longer tainted, right?
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
-
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists