> Every single problem that has been mentioned as reasons not to
> implment Binary Portable modules for the Linux kernel is solvable. In
> fact there are *lots* of incredibly sound reasons for why the Linux
> kernel should be re-worked to support binary loadable modules that
> are portable between kernel versions, *even* for Open Source drivers,
> some of which are:
Supporting portable binary modules adds a lot of work, and slows down
your driver. If you strongly believe in your case: show us the code.
I am confident that a solution to support binary loadable modules will
be accepted by Linus and Alan -- if it does not add overhead to the
kernel.
Further, I don't think you'll get very far arguing against open source
device drivers.
You imply it is bad that the current nature of the kernel practically
forces vendors to open source their drivers. Most of us believe just
the opposite... open sourcing the driver means that you can fix problems
that the vendor can't or won't take care of in a reasonable amount of
time. It means a volunteer can update the driver for a new kernel
version, without having to wait for the vendor.
There are so many reasons why we should strongly encourage open source
drivers.
-- Jeff Garzik | Just once, I wish we would encounter Building 1024 | an alien menace that wasn't immune to MandrakeSoft, Inc. | bullets. -- The Brigadier, "Dr. Who"- 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/