FC2 kernel quality

[Paul Iadonisi]

On Thu, 2004-09-30 at 18:20, Carlos Rodrigues wrote:

[snip]

> Also that "not supported" thing is crap. Binary modules are a fact of 
> life and some care ("some" meaning "break it if you have to, but avoid 
> it if you can") must be taken so that users can use them.

  Personally, I think that *zero* care should be taken to make sure that
users can use binary modules.  The kernel developers have spoken, and it
is not their concern.  With good reason, too, that has been discussed
ad-nauseum on this list as well as many others.  And this coming from a
VMware user who gets an occasional kernel panic when rebooting his
system but never reports it because he doesn't get it on any of his
non-VMware running systems.  It's my choice, it's my problem.
  But on a more constructive side, never underestimate the power of the
Free Software world.  If I remember correctly, it used be like pulling
teeth to get the SCSI card vendors to open up their specs so that their
cards could be supported by Linux.  Then Linux started taking off in the
server room and it wasn't long before they were falling over each other
to offer either specs, or complete (and GPLed) drivers to get their
cards supported under Linux.  Xircom (now owned by Intel) comes to mind,
for one.
  Give it time...the video card vendors will one day, hopefully soon, be
forced to open source their drivers, or give complete specs to implement
drivers so that they can be first to be fully supported (included 3D
acceleration) under Linux.  Er...maybe I shouldn't say 'forced'. 
Rather, they will *also* be falling over each other to get their cards
supported on stock GNU/Linux based operating systems.


-- 
-Paul Iadonisi
 Senior System Administrator
 Red Hat Certified Engineer / Local Linux Lobbyist
 Ever see a penguin fly?  --  Try Linux.
 GPL all the way: Sell services, don't lease secrets