On Wed, 2006-04-26 at 18:18 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote: > sorry, I'll take it back. I found the article (for German readers): > > http://www.heise.de/newsticker/result.xhtml?url=/newsticker/meldung/70092&words=ipw3945 > > and the quote was from Dax Kelson: > > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.network/32622 > > So, indeed no love for ipw3945. Correct, my quote was not about the firmware it was: "It is very disappointing to see this binary user space daemon (that must run as root, presumably to write into /sys/) requirement. I recognize that it is a better poison than a binary kernel module." Basically, I'd rather have a closed userspace app whisper the secret numbers to the hardware than have a close/binary only kernel module do the same. Presumable somebody can sniff out what those secret numbers are (in a legal fashion) then the someone can fork a new driver that includes that functionality. Goodbye closed userspace app! The question is, would Jeff Garzik / Linus accept the forked driver into the kernel? Dax Kelson -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
