Re: [osol-discuss] Re: wifi (was "open source process")

2005-07-28 Thread Chris Ricker
On Thu, 28 Jul 2005, Tao Chen wrote: > I am not familiar with the Wi-Fi issue. > How is it handled by Redhat/SuSe/Debian right now, assuming it's not part of > the Linux kernel? Several of the drivers are part of the Linux kernel. Drivers for wi-fi for Linux fall into about 4 categories: 1. o

Re: [osol-discuss] Re: wifi (was "open source process")

2005-07-28 Thread Roy T. Fielding
On Jul 28, 2005, at 5:52 PM, Keith M Wesolowski wrote: However, I do expect drivers that are open except for one component or set of components needed to initialize the hardware or otherwise provide legally restricted functionality to be given the option of being included. Wi-Fi drivers are one

Re: [osol-discuss] Re: wifi (was "open source process")

2005-07-28 Thread Keith M Wesolowski
On Thu, Jul 28, 2005 at 06:12:55PM -0500, Shawn Walker wrote: > The point is if a driver exists that can be integrated, but has a > required binary only component due to legal or other restrictions and > that is the only way that hardware will work, then to me and many > others it is perfectly acc

Re: [osol-discuss] Re: wifi (was "open source process")

2005-07-28 Thread James C. McPherson
Tao Chen wrote: ... I am not familiar with the Wi-Fi issue. How is it handled by Redhat/SuSe/Debian right now, assuming it's not part of the Linux kernel? ipw2200.sourceforge.net et al have what some people refer to as a HAL (hardware abstraction layer) for the FCC-mandated non-changeable stuf

Re: [osol-discuss] Re: wifi (was "open source process")

2005-07-28 Thread Tao Chen
On 7/28/05, Shawn Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: However, I do expect drivers that are open except for one component orset of components needed to initialize the hardware or otherwiseprovide legally restricted functionality to be given the option ofbeing included. Wi-Fi drivers are one of many v

Re: [osol-discuss] Re: wifi (was "open source process")

2005-07-28 Thread Shawn Walker
On 7/28/05, Tao Chen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 7/28/05, Shawn Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > I don't think that's a very practical view. There is a *lot* of > > hardware out there that cannot be used without some binary component. > > Not just wifi, but many others. Quite

Re: [osol-discuss] Re: wifi (was "open source process")

2005-07-28 Thread Tao Chen
On 7/28/05, Shawn Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I don't think that's a very practical view. There is a *lot* ofhardware out there that cannot be used without some binary component.Not just wifi, but many others. Quite frankly, it should be more about the user and less about ivory tower academic

Re: [osol-discuss] Re: wifi (was "open source process")

2005-07-28 Thread Shawn Walker
On 7/28/05, Roy T. Fielding <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Jul 28, 2005, at 10:47 AM, Mike Kupfer wrote: > > > What about things like wifi drivers? I'm not an expert in the area, > > but > > I'm told that these drivers often contain a binary-only component (even > > in Linux). It's apparently t

[osol-discuss] Re: wifi (was "open source process")

2005-07-28 Thread Roy T . Fielding
On Jul 28, 2005, at 10:47 AM, Mike Kupfer wrote: What about things like wifi drivers? I'm not an expert in the area, but I'm told that these drivers often contain a binary-only component (even in Linux). It's apparently the result of US (FCC) regulatory requirements on the wifi hardware. Th