Re: binary modules (was Re: ReiserFS / 2.4.6 / Data Corruption)

Matthew Gardiner (kiwiunixman@yahoo.co.nz)
Sun, 29 Jul 2001 22:24:11 +1200

On Sunday 29 July 2001 07:08, Alan Cox wrote:
> > The right answer for vendors who want to ship binary modules is to
> > ship an Open Source interface layer which shields the vendor from
> > kernel drift (since users will be able to build the interface layer if
> > they need to, without waiting for the vendor).
>
> As people have seen from vmware and from the ever growing piles of
> nvidia crashes the truth about binary modules in general even with glue is
> pain and suffering.
>
> Veritas have some good Linux people though, and while I'm sad they won't
> open source the core of veritas they do at least appear to have the
> knowledgebase to do a good job

1. With the file system, why not charge for commercial use?
2. Regards to hardware manufacturers, what have the got to lose from
publishing the specs? nothing.

Matthew Gardiner

-- 
WARNING:


This email was written on an OS using the viral 'GPL' as its license.


Please check with Bill Gates before continuing to read this email/posting.


_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com


-
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/