Am Donnerstag, den 13.09.2007, 16:36 -0400 schrieb Steven Toth: > > > >> Also there is to consider a non technical aspect, whether vendors will > >> misuse this interface for binary only, undermining the efforts put in > >> for OSS drivers. > >> > >> > > > > What holds companies for using the current available code putting it > > into an rpm or deb package and releasing such code now? > > > > The Avermedia example I pointed out to is a good example already. > > As from my side I won't release binary drivers. > > Although on the other side: > > * are drivers from vendors which work through several kernel versions > > that bad? > > * Why did someone duallicense videodev2 with BSD/GPL? > > > > I would appreciate if someone else on the list could also comment > > the reason that drivers should all be included in the linuxkernel just > > because forcing the companies to release binary drivers because > > of that. My opinion about that is if a company wants to go opensource > > they will do so, if not they will either not release a driver or release > > nothing. > > > > > > > I know for certain that adding a userland API tuner/demod interface to > the kernel, allowing non-caring opportunistic silicon or board vendors > to developer closed source proprietary drivers, will have a negative > effect on the community and we'd set back linuxtv 3-5 years. > > I know for certain that it would happen. Trust me. > > I've told you this countless times and you're not hearing me. > > Hauppauge have some leverage with Conexant and NXP to release public > datasheets. If they just have to release a demod.so (or similar) > loadable, they'll defer to the board vendors and we'll see the certain > board vendors 'locking other board vendors' out of their drivers. We'll > see embedded firmware, not shared between drivers. > > Except, it won't stop at demod.so. It will extend into unfixable bugs > for VendorB's board, because VendorA doesn't want to release a new > demod.so, and VendorB has no linux resources. What happens next? For > financial reasons - demod.so will begin to include checks to see if > specific PCI or USB devices are present in the system, and will fail to > work properly (if at all) when they're not being used with the preferred > products. > > Read my lips: For commercial reasons, this enables driver components > that only work if specific boards are present. > > - Steve > I do confirn that I have all this, Steve mentions, really have seen already! Markus, sorry, they did abuse it and will do it again. Hermann _______________________________________________ linux-dvb mailing list linux-dvb@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb
