Linked by Eugenia Loli on Tue 18th Apr 2006 17:49 UTC
Linux Efforts to bring glitzy new graphics to Linux are fueling an old conflict: Does proprietary software belong in open-source Linux? The issue involves software modules called drivers, which plug into the kernel at the heart of the open-source operating system. Drivers let software communicate with hardware such as network adapters, hard drives and video cards.
Thread beginning with comment 116072
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: I'm all for it.
by cr8dle2grave on Tue 18th Apr 2006 20:21 UTC in reply to "RE: I'm all for it."
cr8dle2grave
Member since:
2005-07-11

Using proprietary drivers sort of defeats the purpose of having a free software operating system in the first place.

Care to explain to me how my using proprietary drivers defeats my purposes for using a FOSS opererating system? Perhaps your purposes for doing so are not the same as everyone else's, eh?

But, the reality is is that these drivers are running deep in the GPL'ed kernel territory - which is exactly where they should not be if they are proprietary and not free software.

That's not for you to say. That's not for me to say. It's most certainly not for RMS to say. They only people with a legitimate say are those who have contributed code to the Linux kernel, and those who have contributed have done so under explicit licensing terms which are a far sight more hospitable to proprietary drivers than you seem to be.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: I'm all for it.
by Moulinneuf on Tue 18th Apr 2006 21:17 in reply to "RE[2]: I'm all for it."
Moulinneuf Member since:
2005-07-06

"Care to explain to me how my using proprietary drivers defeats my purposes for using a FOSS opererating system?"

Certainly , your a user , if you feel the proprietary driver are lacking , feel free to make them.

"Perhaps your purposes for doing so are not the same as everyone else's, eh?"

The only one stopping proprietary driver in GNU/Linux is you , its not like anyone as stopped you from making them ? You just cant legally include them in th kernel , but feel free to contribute proprietary module that connect to it.

"That's not for you to say."

Your right its the GPL that say so.

"They only people with a legitimate say are those who have contributed code to the Linux kernel"

Legally , no , they have to comply with the GPL.

"and those who have contributed have done so under explicit licensing terms which are a far sight more hospitable to proprietary drivers than you seem to be."

All the included driver are GPL or GPL compatible.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: I'm all for it.
by cr8dle2grave on Tue 18th Apr 2006 21:38 in reply to "RE[3]: I'm all for it."
cr8dle2grave Member since:
2005-07-11

Certainly , your a user , if you feel the proprietary driver are lacking , feel free to make them.

Huh? Whatever are you talking about? This article and the ensuing discussion doesn't concern the availability of proprietary drivers, but the the ethics of using the ones that already exist.

The only one stopping proprietary driver in GNU/Linux is you

You seem to have seriously misunderstood my comment. I'm not complaining about a percieved lack of proprietary drivers. Truth be known, I'm very much in favor of using FOSS drivers wherever possible. What I do have a problem with is those who claim that using proprietary drivers is somehow an ethically suspect behavior (the subject of the article).

Legally , no , they have to comply with the GPL

The Linux kernel is licensed under a modified GPL, which has the effect of making it more hospitable to proprietary drivers than it would be if released under a plain vanilla GPL.

Reply Parent Score: 2