On Tue, 2006-02-21 at 14:12 +0100, Robert Schiele wrote: > On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 07:49:21AM -0500, Kenneth Schneider wrote: > > I just can't understand the stance of the kernel developers shutting out > > companies that are trying to provide drivers for their product. This is > > certainly more FUD fuel being provided to MS. Who are the kernel > > developers to tell a company to stop exactly what we need more of, > > You just didn't get it. _They_ have written the code and thus it is part of > _their_ intellectual property rights to decide about the license of their > code. If you don't like the license of a software product you are free not to > use it. > > Actually there _are_ good technical reasons against binary-only drivers. If > you are not aware of them you can browse the list archives of the kernel > mailing list. But even if there did not exist _any_ technical reason it is > still their decission because they provide something to you for free. Either > you like it or you don't like it. It is ok to state your opinion about that > topic but I hope you do understand now "who the kernel developers are". > I -do- know who they are and I -DO- appreciate the great work that they do I just cannot nor will I ever understand the justification for the kernel developers telling Novell to stop distributing the non-GPL drivers I.E. kernel-smp-nongpl-2.6.13-15.8. If the inclusion of this RPM helps Novell sell more copies of their distribution then I say let Novell do so and help further the linux cause. Next thing you know the kernel developers will tell distributions to stop including -any- non-gpl software under the guise that it -may- taint the kernel. Just plain old BULL S#)T as far as I am concerned.
-- Ken Schneider UNIX since 1989, linux since 1994, SuSE since 1998 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
