To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
umccullough,
"I used to feel similarly - but I've come to realize that hardware manufacturers have basically become the decision makers for which OSes live and die... I'm not sure it's 'much better' as a result."
It's worse than that. The binary drivers are usually version dependent (thanks to linus' vision that ABIs are bad).
I maintain a custom linux kernel with AUFS patches and I already have to choose kernels by compatibility with AUFS (which has been rejected by mainline). Luckily I don't need graphics on these kernels, but if I did my initial impression is that it'd be even more difficult finding a combination of kernels/binaries/patches that work together.
It would be nice if there was more kernel API/ABI stability such that compatibility would be less of an issue.
I agree with you. They killed a lot of interesting OSes and their blobs are a big source of frustration. the only solution is a specification for GFX that describes the hardware interface and is device maker independent with a mobile profile.




Member since:
2010-06-08
As usual of course. Still much better than no drivers at all.