Just a quick clarification before this thing explodes in another "ten
thousan messages" thread.
>>>>> "np" == Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org> writes:
np> On Wed, 5 Feb 2003 andrea.glorioso@binary-only.com wrote:
>> >>>>> "rl" == Robert Love <rml@mvista.com> writes:
>>
rl> Further, all of the source is available anyhow in various open
rl> source projects.
>> I failed to find any source for Montavista XIP implementation,
>> which they claim they have put on their "Consumer Electronics"
>> release.
np> Hey, it's one of my many duties to release this XIP code to
np> the community. In other words, Monta Vista do actually pay me
np> to give that source away.
That's wonderful (no kidding).
np> It's just not up to the cleanliness level I expect of
np> community source even if customers usually don't care, and I
np> didn't have time to clean it up yet. But if you really insist
np> I can give you a raw patch.
It would be quite interesting for me, sincerely. Feel free to send me
the patch if you can.
np> I find it quite saddening that a lot of people only care about
np> making up shit while the company in question is devoting a lot
np> of money in salary to hire kernel developers full time whose
np> work has always been merged to community trees so far.
As far as I'm concerned, I just wrote:
- that Montavista claims they implemented XIP as part of their
"Consumer Electronics Edition" package;
- that source code is included in Montavista preview kit, but that I
couldn't find any XIP reference in it;
- that probably XIP is a part of the CEE edition but *not* of the
preview kit, hence the lack of source code for that specific part in
the ISO I downloaded; incidentally, that also means that right now I'm
not entitled to have source code for Montavista XIP implementation
(and I stated that clearly);
I personally don't have anything against Montavista, and I think
they're doing a good work (I know that you have to balance between
distributing source code and having your old-minded customers run away
in fear). I still think that having an encrypted ISO image is pure
brain damage, because it doesn't buy Montavista anything as far as I
can tell and it just slows down casual observers - which, by the way,
are the kind of people Montavista is supposed to attract. :)
Let's straighten out this issue. Maybe a public development tree of
Montavista kernels, with a big red flag saying "don't use this on
production systems" would be enough.
Best regards,
-- Andrea Glorioso andrea.glorioso@binary-only.com Binary Only http://www.binary-only.com/ Via A. Zanolini, 7/b Tel: +39-348.921.43.79 40126 Bologna Fax: +39-051-930.31.133 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Feb 07 2003 - 22:00:18 EST