A position statement on closed-source kernel modules
Posted Jun 23, 2008 14:17 UTC (Mon) by Duncan (guest, #6647)
[Link]
I noticed that as well. Based on past statements, I think he's rather
more willing to deal with closed modules than some, and probably doesn't
consider them so flatly "harmful and undesirable" under all conditions, at
least not to the point he was willing to sign the statement.
Duncan
A position statement on closed-source kernel modules
Posted Jun 23, 2008 15:04 UTC (Mon) by dmarti (subscriber, #11625)
[Link]
"I'm a complete non-believer in binary modules" -- Linus Torvalds
A position statement on closed-source kernel modules
Posted Jun 23, 2008 14:36 UTC (Mon) by ctg (subscriber, #3459)
[Link]
It's quite undermining of the whole position - after all, it is _his_ kernel (or a least,
commonly viewed as such).
A position statement on closed-source kernel modules
Posted Jun 23, 2008 14:55 UTC (Mon) by ctg (subscriber, #3459)
[Link]
I meant to add:
If you are aiming this at "corporates" (after all, who else develops closed source drivers) it
should, ideally, be the statement of the Linux Foundation itself, as this would have far more
weight that what, to the uninitiated, looks like a load of pseudo-random individuals.
A position statement on closed-source kernel modules
Posted Jun 23, 2008 15:28 UTC (Mon) by rsidd (subscriber, #2582)
[Link]
Other notable missing names I noticed: Al Viro, David Miller.
In Linus's case, it could be that he doesn't want to take an official position (which could be
construed as being "on behalf of" the project), regardless of his own opinions. This could be
because binary modules aren't being outlawed anytime soon...
doomed without the mad russian
Posted Jun 23, 2008 15:30 UTC (Mon) by dankamongmen (subscriber, #35141)
[Link]
Nothing worth doing gets done without Alexey Kuznetsov!
or garzik. or rusty.