On 22 December 2010 21:22, Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Having accommodations in the kernel for proprietary drivers is not a > mutual benefit anymore. ÂThat might be hard to understand from your > point of view, but the incentives in the Open Source communities aren't > based on commercial results. DISCLAIMER: I'm also a Debian developer -have been since 1999 with a small 2y break- so I _do_ know the F/OSS community point of view. My goals have been always in promoting open source and free software solutions when and when not available. Right now open source solutions are _not_ available, and that is the problem. I haven't reversed engineered any driver so I can't claim of knowledge in this matter. However I've been following closely other such projects like nouveau and it took them a _long_ time to get to this point here -which may be usable for many people, but it's not even at a beta state according to the Nouveau developers. Even if we assume the fact that 10 times more ARM F/OSS developers gather to reverse engineer the binary blobs, how long do you think it would take until a beta driver appears? 1 year? 2 years? And what will happen in the meantime? I'm not advocating that closed source drivers be included in the kernel, but IMHO, having an open kernel-space driver would also help the reverse engineering process at the same time as allowing common users as well as developers to use and test any 3D applications -don't forget that 3D problems don't end at the driver, rather the opposite. Konstantinos _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
