[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Whats with the petty Open Source Pureness that has killed PWCX

seth vidal wrote:
On Sat, 2004-08-28 at 21:22 -0400, Listman wrote:

We are all being shafted in this one. For those of you like me that have
experienced high quality video courtesy of PWCX.....


Is their any way to talk some sense into the Kernel maintainers?

You might want to read Greg K-H's faq before you go 'talking sense' into


What is next, don't allow nvidia driver to load?

This would make an enormous number of fedora devel people happy. :)

Thanks for the link to the articles. I especially enjoyed the comment regarding legality and morality.

And I thought that most of these lists were pretty tame and dry.

On the inclusion of hooks and binary only drivers. It is understandable that the source code is freely available, hooks can be added. A user space alternative can be come up with to overcome the removal of the hook from the kernel.

On the hardware support for as many devices that are possible, especially issues related to getting highly functional and useful devices running optimally, it would be decent to have.

Of course, I'm carrying a binary driver around recently myself (i810_dvr.o) until the development build catches up with my hardware used. I know the patch and rebuilding the package from source would be ideal. I find that it is easier than installing xorg-x11 to test to see if it works, finding out that it doesn't work, then reinstalling all of the older rpms or recompiling xorg-x11 from source with each new release.

Basically, I see the benifits from an all open source system and would ideally shoot for this sysem. I also understand that sometimes being too pure with the source vs. binary issues can be time consuming and a challenge on those that are just shooting for a great running and hardware richly supported system that doesn't rip you off by closing the code to the world.

Nvidia and the PWCX can move to open source and reduce their overhead and allow others to improve the software that makes their hardware function correctly. I'm sure that the respect for the industries would be recognized and they would have input from others on how to optimize their hardware functionality even more.

my morality vs. legality view,


-- Linus, Alan - Please apply the following self-explanatory patch.

+       /* LynuxWorks are politely reminded that removing copyright
+          notices is an offence under the Copyright Design and
+          Patents Act 1988, and under equivalent non-UK law in
+          accordance with the Berne Convention. */
+       printk("Portions (C) 2000, 2001 Red Hat, Inc.\n");

- David Woodhouse on linux-kernel

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]