[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Release plans
From: |
Johannes Weiner |
Subject: |
Re: Release plans |
Date: |
Thu, 14 Aug 2008 14:27:07 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux) |
Hi Tassilo,
Tassilo Horn <address@hidden> writes:
> On Thursday 14 August 2008 13:07:35 Johannes Weiner wrote:
>
> Hi Hannes,
>
>> Neither the Linux kernel, nor I as a free user who chooses not to load
>> proprietary bullcrap into it, have been harmed by the kernel's
>> mechanism to load said bullcrap.
>
> That needs not to be true. Take the nvidia drivers as an example. If
> the kernel wouldn't allow this driver to be loaded, we might have a
> better free driver today. Who knows?
It seems to solve itself evolutionary. nvidia sucks so bad at keeping
up with the kernel api, left aside frequent, undebuggable oopsen, that I
know quite some people who's subsequent video card has been an ATI card
just because there are now free drivers available.
I myself have an nvidia card due to historic reasons which I can not
fully utilize because I decided to not use the nvidia driver. But as
soon I have enough money for an upgrade, I will sure as hell get a video
card that is supported by free drivers. And in my case, this is not
only a technical decision.
When someone asks me for help with their kernel becoming unstable after
loading proprietary modules, I explain them that it's neither the
kernels fault, nor the module-vendors fault. It's the person's fault
who made the decision.
Noone `subjugated' a user of the proprietary nvidia module. Only their
own stupidity.
> The same applies to the intel wireless drivers, which require some
> proprietary firmware. If something works, the attraction of
> implementing a free alternative fades away.
I consider ath5k and the ati drivers proving the opposite. I think
Richard has yet another wireless card that works with free drivers.
I actually see a trend in free drivers evolving.
> Of course you can argue the other way round, too. Would GNU/Linux be
> where it is today if no proprietary drivers allowed most features of the
> computer to be used?
I don't know. But are there so many proprietary modules at all? I
believe there are by far more free modules than non-free ones for the
kernel.
And even if I would myself not do so, I would prefer a user running a
complete GNU/Linux system with one proprietary module loaded to get his
work done over him running a completely non-free environment.
You can still fight the remaining evil. And I consider myself as a
proof that the figthing spirit is not lost just because there is a
working non-free module available.
Hannes
- Re: Release plans, (continued)
- Re: Release plans, Richard M. Stallman, 2008/08/13
- Re: Release plans, Alan Mackenzie, 2008/08/13
- Re: Release plans, Richard M. Stallman, 2008/08/14
- Re: Release plans, Alan Mackenzie, 2008/08/14
- Re: Release plans, Johannes Weiner, 2008/08/14
- Re: Release plans, Alfred M. Szmidt, 2008/08/14
- Re: Release plans, Johannes Weiner, 2008/08/14
- Re: Release plans, Alan Mackenzie, 2008/08/14
- Re: Release plans, Johannes Weiner, 2008/08/14
- Re: Release plans, Tassilo Horn, 2008/08/14
- Re: Release plans,
Johannes Weiner <=
- Re: Release plans, Richard M. Stallman, 2008/08/15
- Re: Release plans, Alan Mackenzie, 2008/08/14
- Re: Release plans, Johannes Weiner, 2008/08/14
- Re: Release plans, Alan Mackenzie, 2008/08/14
- Re: Release plans, Johannes Weiner, 2008/08/14
- Re: Release plans, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2008/08/14
- Re: Release plans, Gilaras Drakeson, 2008/08/14
- Re: Release plans, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2008/08/14
- Re: Release plans, Richard M. Stallman, 2008/08/15
- Re: Release plans, Alan Mackenzie, 2008/08/15