Summarizing the PWC driver questions/answers
From: | Greg KH <greg-AT-kroah.com> | |
To: | linux-kernel-AT-vger.kernel.org, linux-usb-devel-AT-lists.sourceforge.net | |
Subject: | Summarizing the PWC driver questions/answers | |
Date: | Fri, 27 Aug 2004 09:26:13 -0700 |
So, I've gotten a lot of emails about this topic, so I'll just answer them all here in public, and point people at them when they ask them again: First off, here's Nemosoft's big post about the driver, please read that first, and the responses to that thread: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.usb.devel/26310 And here's Linus's response after I removed the driver, when Nemosoft asked me to: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/229968 Oh, and there's now a lwn.net thread too: http://lwn.net/Articles/99615/ Ok, on to the questions: Q: Why did you remove the hook from the pwc driver? A: It was there for the explicit purpose to support a binary only module. That goes against the kernel's documented procedures, so I had to take it out. Q: That hook had been in there for years! Why did you suddenly decide to remove it now? A: I was really not aware of the hook, and the fact that it was only good for a binary module to use. I'm sorry, I should have realized this years ago, but I didn't. Recently someone pointed this hook out to me, and the fact that it really didn't belong in there due to the kernel's policy of such hooks. So, once I became aware of it, I had no choice but to remove it. Q: Why did you delete the whole pwc driver from the tree? A: That is what the original author (Nemosoft) wanted to happen. It was his request, and I honored it. Go ask him why he wanted it out if you are upset about this, I merely accepted his decision as he was the current maintainer and author of the code. Q: But you took away my freedom! Isn't Linux about freedom? A: Again, it was Nemosoft's decision. The kernel also has to abide by it's documented procedures, so that is why the hook had to go. Remember, the original driver was released under the GPL, so you are free to take that code and maintain it if you so desire. I'd gladly support someone taking the GPL code and agreeing to maintain it, and resubmitting it for inclusion in the main kernel tree. That's the freedom that Linux provides, no closed source OS would allow you to do that, if a company pulled support for a product (which happens all the time.) Q: You jerk, I had invested lots of money in this camera, you are costing me money by ripping it out. You should be ashamed of yourself! A: See the above question about freedom. If it means that much to you, then offer to maintain the code, it's that simple. Q: You are keeping companies from wanting to write binary drivers for Linux. A: Duh! What do you think all of the kernel developers have been stating for years, in public. Binary drivers only take from Linux, they do not give back anything. See Andrew Morton's OLS 2004 keynote address for more information and background on this topic. Q: You are a fundamentalist turd / jerk / pompous ass / GNU-freebeer-biased-idiot-fundamentalist fucktard / ignorant slut! A: I've been called worse by better people, get over yourself. - 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/
Posted Aug 27, 2004 19:17 UTC (Fri)
by horen (guest, #2514)
[Link] (5 responses)
I thought his first name was "Greg", not "Jane"!
Posted Aug 27, 2004 19:39 UTC (Fri)
by stephen_pollei (guest, #23348)
[Link] (3 responses)
Posted Aug 27, 2004 21:19 UTC (Fri)
by TimCunningham (guest, #10316)
[Link]
Posted Aug 28, 2004 19:18 UTC (Sat)
by branden (guest, #7029)
[Link]
[Hint: This is LWN, not Slashdot. You are expected to read the article before commenting on it.]
Posted Aug 30, 2004 12:55 UTC (Mon)
by fjf33 (guest, #5768)
[Link]
Posted Aug 27, 2004 23:32 UTC (Fri)
by dmarti (subscriber, #11625)
[Link]
Use Binary-Only Kernel Modules, Hate Life (
"Most houses that use Linux a lot say that they won't support binary modules because they can't. They may work, but you're not getting the full advantage of Linux" -- Linus Torvalds)
"ignorant slut"?Summarizing the PWC driver questions/answers
I thought Greg's FAQ was very well point together. There is no reason to debase yourself by resorting to profanity.troll
He's quoting the FAQ and making / continuing the reference to Saturday Night Live. It's a joke, relax.troll
Heh. Someone did just embarrass themselves very badly, and it wasn't the guy you replied to. :)troll
Is taht a reference to sex? Can there be ale sluts or is it only female sluts? English is not my first language. Is this a language thing or a cultural thing? What I mean is that there are words taht have the same meaning in every region and there are words that don't. Is this one an example of the ones that don't?Summarizing the PWC driver questions/answers
Andrew Morton's Speech at Ottawa Linux Symposium 2004 - Transcript
Summarizing the PWC driver questions/answers