Re: [SLE] Rhetorical question
- From: "Jeff Rollin" <jeff.rollin@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 00:58:27 +0100
On 20/09/06, Darryl Gregorash <raven@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I can see no reason for complaining that people who do not comply with the
On 20/09/06 03:42, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>>Recently, I got a couple of these:
>>
>>Sep 5 20:34:55 static24-89-67-198 kernel: thinkpad: module not
>>supported by Novell, setting U taint flag.
>>
>>Why the system thought this was a thinkpad is beyond me, it isn't even a
>>laptop... so much for shooting *myself* in the foot.
>>
>
>Nono, that is different.
>
>No taint flag = phone someone
> Your options: Novell, LKML or ModuleAuthor
>
>U taint flag = don't try phone Novell
> Your options: LKML or ModuleAuthor
>
Translation: "If you have a thinkpad, and are foolish enough to install
SuSELinux on it, don't call us."
Can you think of any reason why Novell doesn't support a SBAwe32 (which
is the card I referred to before)? The source (included in the kernel
source package) certainly *seems* to be open-source.
>T taint flag = don't try phone anyone in the opensource community for it
> Your options: ModuleAuthor
Bottom line, this all means what to the average user? To the average
user, the difference between a tainted kernel and ndiswrapper is
non-existent: It will all come down to him being unable to find support
from the people who wrote the product he is using, and possibly being
unable to find support from anyone. The average user will simply
translate either situation into "Novell doesn't even support it's own
products" and switch back to <the OS from Redmond>, or some other Linux
distro. The switch back to <the OS from Redmond> will come even faster,
if refusal to support comes from the OSS community generally. Indeed, if
a few of the recent threads on this list are any indication, such a user
would be subjected to a great deal of derision, with the occasional
suggestion that he should just go buy another (whatever device he
bought) from a more Linux-friendly manufacturer, or simply go back to
Windows.
BTW, does all this disdain for non-GPL device drivers mean that anyone
who ever installs a Blu-Ray or HD-DVD into his Linux machine (any
distro) will no longer receive support for anything from the OSS
community? Because I can assure you, if you will be waiting for open
source drivers for either of these, you will be waiting longer than this
lifetime.
Of course, if you are an absolute purist, like Mr Harris, then you will
just boycott those products, and refuse to use them at all -- even past
the day when one of them becomes the de facto standard, and the
present-day DVD has gone the way of the dinosaur.
--
Check the headers for your unsubscription address
For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@xxxxxxxx
Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com
Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@xxxxxxxx
Linux licensing requirements are not given quarter; if a company disclosed
confidential Windows specs or code, in breach of a Windows licence, in order
to write a driver under the GPL (or any other), the response from Redmond
would be a lot heavier and nastier than a snide remark or 20 on a mailing
list.
Jeff Rollin
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [SLE] Rhetorical question
- From: Darryl Gregorash
- Re: [SLE] Rhetorical question
- References:
- [SLE] Rhetorical question
- From: Stevens
- Re: [SLE] Rhetorical question
- From: M Harris
- Re: [SLE] Rhetorical question
- From: Darryl Gregorash
- Re: [SLE] Rhetorical question
- From: Jan Engelhardt
- Re: [SLE] Rhetorical question
- From: Darryl Gregorash
- [SLE] Rhetorical question
- Prev by Date: Re: [SLE] Can´t log in as root HELP?
- Next by Date: Re: [SLE] Can´t log in as root HELP?
- Previous by thread: Re: [SLE] Rhetorical question
- Next by thread: Re: [SLE] Rhetorical question
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
