| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Binary-only kernel modules may be bannedBinary-only kernel modules may be bannedPosted Dec 16, 2006 21:52 UTC (Sat) by grahammm (guest, #773)In reply to: Binary-only kernel modules may be banned by drag Parent article: Binary-only kernel modules may be banned
As has been said many times before, if they were to simply release the hardware interface specification then the open source community would write the drivers. The hardware vendors would not have to spend any of their budget on Linux.
(Log in to post comments)
Binary-only kernel modules may be banned Posted Dec 17, 2006 2:41 UTC (Sun) by bronson (subscriber, #4806) [Link] This presumes that there even ARE understandable hardware specifications. Back when I was writing Mac System 7 display drivers, I had to drive over to S3, sign a boatload of NDAs, then dig through RTL with one of their ASIC guys to try to figure out how to use their colorspace-converting blit.
Proprietary? VERY. If I somehow copied those docs, I probably could have duplicated their chip in a very short amount of time.
Not everybody produces nice, bound documentation with register maps and readable descriptions. Especially when the shelf life of the product is measured in months.
If they'd just open their drivers, though, that might be enough. A few commented header files go a LONG way.
|
|
||||||||||||