> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Perry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, May 08, 2000 3:23 PM
> To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> Subject: RE: [Cooker] Licence, issues, (Nvidia, binary, drivers
>
>
>
> I wonder if anybody noticed that the source rpm's ARE available
> here:
>
source rpm does not mean source ...
netscape doesnt' provide source to its browser and it's still in rpm.
>
> http://www.nvidia.com/Marketing/Developer/OpenDrvDwn.nsf/b99b7f622
> d429347882
> 568c800771b6c/b5d08c2ad55d2589882568cb0077f10d/$FILE/NVIDIA_kernel
> -0.9-2.src
> ..rpm
>
>
>
>
> http://www.nvidia.com/Marketing/Developer/OpenDrvDwn.nsf/b99b7f622
> d429347882
> 568c800771b6c/5d6fbf8c61014e4b882568cb00780d59/$FILE/NVIDIA_GLX-0.
> 9-2.src.rp
> m
>
>
> Now, what you are allowed to do with these sources, and if modified or
> re-written to whom they would belong would
> be interesting to know.....
>
> BTW: I apologies in advance to any stuffed up formatting as I am at work
> using Outlook :-(
>
> Cheers:
> Michael Perry.
> R&D. Dep. Netafim Magal.
> <<<<Line -- the Ultimate Windows Service Pack>>>>
> The three most dangerous things are a programmer with a soldering iron, a
> manager who codes, and a user who gets ideas.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: David Foresman [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Mon 08 May 2000 6:27
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: [Cooker] Licence, issues, (Nvidia, binary, drivers
> >
> > perfect example of this is the creative SBLIVE driver.
> >
> > original sblive linux driver was closed source binary only driver.
> >
> > after creative opened the drivers source (and even provided developers
> > from
> > inside the company) there are daily improvements to the driver.
> >
> > and this driver is now a major part of most linux
> distributions, and will
> > be
> > in linux 2.4.0 as a standard module.
> >
> > If NVIDIA did this i would be VERY happy, and yes, the drivers would be
> > much
> > faster under linux than they are under WINXX.
> >
> > The reason people buy nvidia cards is because they are ****** fast.
> > Faster
> > than everything else out there. But from a publicity
> standpoint, it would
> > be better if people didn't buy them and we went with something that had
> > open
> > source drivers. It just wouldn't be as fast.
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "ptah" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Sunday, May 07, 2000 11:09 PM
> > Subject: Re: [Cooker] Licence, issues, (Nvidia, binary, drivers
> >
> >
> > > > Um, yes nVidia said they will correct their GPL violation.
> That's not
> > > > what concerns me. What concerns me is people demanding that we start
> > > > putting more non-free software in the distro. Pretty soon
> it'll get to
> > > > the point where 25% of the distro (probably mostly drivers)
> are closed
> > > > source. There's something disturbing about that. I don't want to go
> > back
> > > > to waiting 6 months to a year for a vendor to update their drivers.
> > The
> > > > power of the free software movement is to allow anyone with
> the proper
> > > > knowledge to improve code..make it more efficient. I'd be just about
> > > > willing to bet that within a month of nVidia releasing
> GPL'ed drivers,
> > > > their video cards would see much improvement in their performance
> > under
> > > > Linux. So I guess my point is, if people want to buy closed source
> > > > hardware, they can install the drivers themselves.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Ok I see your point and I totally agree with you. John Carmack of ID
> > > even said if the source code for drivers were available he would
> > > take time and optimize each vendors drivers for linux.
> > >
> > >
>
