This is why it's _very_ important that we have access to either source
code and/or specifications, for the sake of stability. I agree with you
in that stability is a major issue, but this can be easily solved with the
linux community having access to information.
If there is a problem with a UDI driver, I would assume that the creator
would be first responsible for a fix. I don't knwo specifics on UDI but
I shoudl hop ethta if it 'barfs' in Linux it is goign to barf in _all_
other systems as well. And thus the vendor will be urged to have the
problem resolved.
As an off topic note: does not anyone see this as an attempt to corner a
market such as Microsoft does with thair drivers base? Most users by MS
simply because of product support. How many would be tempted to not
only buy by singularly develop for an architecture which, well, has a
large drivers base, e.g. more product support. (i'm asking for it, i know,
but in all honesty, how far does UDI extend? Alpha? Sun? Will Apple join
in? And how well woudl a UDI driver scale accross those platforms? Is it
really something fit for Linux, a seemingly cross-platform operating
system?
... but stability is an issue.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/