Re: Binary only module question

[Tim Bird]

Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> I'm composing a list of all existing binary only modules,

Will the list be available somewhere?

I'm working on a tool that (among other things) indicates
what is "accepted practice" for loadable modules that
are binary.  I seem to recall Linus saying, some years
ago, something about the the fact that the module must
not be fundamental to basic kernel operation.  I can't remember
the exact details of the quote (if anyone has it, I'd 
appreciate a reference to it), but I thought the general
spirit was that add-on's are OK, but basic functionality
(like the scheduler, memory management, driver
*systems* (not drivers themselves), etc.) were off limits for
being binary modules.

I'm assuming that if a module is currently known, and there
does not appear to be great backlash against it, that it 
is accepted practice.  Also, I assume that modules that
perform essentially the same functionality as these would
also be acceptable (from a community standpoint - the
legal standpoint is a different matter).  Basically, I'm
infering a kind of community precendence from existing
known binary modules?

Am I way off?

(And yes, I know that given a choice, the community
vastly prefers an open source module over a binary module)

____________________________________________________________
Tim Bird                                  Lineo, Inc.
Senior VP, Research                       390 South 400 West
[e-mail]                           Lindon, UT 84042