Re: [OT] RE: UDI and Free Software

Shaun Wilson (plexus@ionet.net)
Tue, 6 Oct 1998 10:07:14 -0500 (CDT)


>
> I never said it did.. I should have said: Binary only drivers encourage
> poor drivers (because they arn't seen) and UDI encourages Binary only
> drivers. The simple fact of using UDI will not make it crap (though it
> might make is slow, that's yet to be seen)..
>

maybe... just maybe.. it's not such a bad idea that Linux should develop
it's own set of UDI drivers as has been done up until now? Yes it would be
tempting to just use a vendors commercial(albeit seemingly free) driver,
but will it come with Linux? no. Shoudl linux have an adequate equal? I
think yes.

One problem I see is that it would be stupid for Linux to not include its
own set of drivers. Just simply stupid, at least up until UDI is a stable
means of drivers distribution and everyone is happy with the results.

That's not to say that linux should not SUPPORT UDI.

UDI _support_ should be something that should not be missed out on.

-
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/