|
|
Log in / Subscribe / Register

Linux in a binary world... a doomsday scenario

Linux in a binary world... a doomsday scenario

Posted Dec 8, 2005 15:20 UTC (Thu) by NRArnot (subscriber, #3033)
Parent article: Linux in a binary world... a doomsday scenario

Wouldn't a bit of pragmatism be better than dogmatic adherence to the one true way (whatever you think that might be?)

I'm fairly happy to use the NVidia drivers because by and large they work, and more because I have at least two ways of doing without them should I need to (run a lower-performance open-source driver instead, or remove the graphics card and plug in something else). I'd be a lot less happy if it were a driver for something essential embedded on a motherboard, without which I culd not access my data. In fact, that would worry me so much I'd not buy that motherboard at all. But I'd also be very unhappy if it became impossible for vendors to offer limited co-operation with the OSS community for fear of releasing their trade secrets to their competitors.

A suggestion that might bridge a gap: software escrow. How about if manufacturers who do not want to reveal secrets to their competitors deposit the source of every binary blob they release with a trusted third party? There could be a standard agreement about what they need to do on a continuing basis in order to keep their sources secret. At some time they may decide that the product is obsolescent, the secrets no longer important to keep, and it is no longer in their interest to maintain the blobs - at that point the source would be released to the community. Because it's in escrow and because they had already signed a binding agreement, they could not go back on their word and land us with a big problem.

Such agreements are not uncommon in the closed-source proprietary world, to protect a business against the consequence of a key softwre supplier going bust or otherwise failing to provide adequate support.


to post comments

Linux in a binary world... a doomsday scenario

Posted Dec 8, 2005 16:05 UTC (Thu) by fenrus (guest, #31654) [Link] (1 responses)

and then what?

if/when most of the binary modules are only available for RHEL or SLES, does it really matter that there's an escrow thing? NVidia and ATI are special in a way because they go through the trouble of making a special glue layer. Most others actually don't bother, and don't want to bother with a community with 15 different compilers and distros, and only do RHEL and SLES as a result.

And the NVidia *is* holding the kernel back already to some degree; several changes get blocked either directly because they break the current nvidia, or from fear to get dozens of hate mails from nvidia users..

Linux in a binary world... a doomsday scenario

Posted Dec 9, 2005 13:50 UTC (Fri) by bockman (guest, #3650) [Link]

NVidia and ATI are special in a way because they go through the trouble of making a special glue layer.

Maybe this should be unofficially indicated as the second best choice after releasing the full code. It allows kernel developers not to be API-bounded and allows hardware vendors to hide their supposedly-valuable IP in the binary blob. Meanwhile, the 'open' external layer allows third parties to fix things when the kernel API changes and/or the vendor drops support for the hardware.

I know that this still is not free software, and I am not saying that the external layers of such drivers should be part of official kernels. But at least, if most vendors would adopt this approach, things would be slightly better.

Ciao
-----
FB


Copyright © 2026, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds