ntfs
Chris Ricker
kaboom at gatech.edu
Sat Jul 26 12:41:19 UTC 2003
On Sat, 26 Jul 2003, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> On Sat, 26 Jul 2003, Daniel Huettl wrote:
>
> > Please consider including the ntfs module. It is an absolute nuisance to
> > have to compile it oneself. The module works perfectly well, and people
> > have been clamouring to have it included for over a year now:
> >
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65749
>
> one of the comments from a RH person at that bug from last year
> states that it must be "legally possible/sensible" to do so,
> neither of which seems to make much sense.
I think you're misreading that. Read it as "legally possible and legally
sensible". Is it legal to ship that binary? Arguably, yes. Is it a sensible
corporate move to do so? Given the DMCA, etc., no. The driver simply isn't
worth the potential fallout (particularly since it barely works anyway --
potential risk far outweighs potential reward).
Long-term, that's one of the things that projects like fedora and other
community add-on sites are for: adding features RH can't ship for legal
reasons (ntfs, mp3), won't ship (reiserfs and xfs, apparently), etc.
later,
chris
More information about the test
mailing list