Because the Linux stuff is mostly very GPL. Adrian On Oct 23, 2013 2:15 PM, "Alfred Perlstein" <bright_at_mu.org> wrote: > On 10/23/13 11:11 AM, Adrian Chadd wrote: > >> On 23 October 2013 11:09, Alfred Perlstein <bright_at_mu.org> wrote: >> >> >> Eh, having taken a stab at porting the bwl blob already, I would strongly >>> >>>> oppose removing NDIS. If you do that I will just stop using my netbook >>>> with a Broadcom part altogether as I wouldn't be able to use it to try >>>> to >>>> test bwl changes. The NDIS thing is a bit hackish, but it is quite >>>> useful >>>> for a lot of folks. >>>> >>>> I have to agree. Deprecation != motivation. >>>> >>> >> I can pull out examples of this not holding true: >> >> * all the giant locking in drivers >> * all the giant locking in VFS >> >> People did pop up and claim ownership of things they cared about. Some >> stuff died, some stuff didn't. There was enough of a motivation by us to >> kill giant off in these pathways so things could continue to evolve. We >> didn't leave the GIANT crutch in forever. >> >> >> Sure, however those drivers and vfs systems were not sustainable and > holding the kernel back. > > What part of the NDISulator actually holds the system back? I'm saying > that it seems as if it was conjecture rather than a need. Is the > NDISulator giant locked? > > Also why the interest in writing drivers so much? Being able to leverage > other platform drivers is pretty neat and saves us a ton of work. > > -- > Alfred Perlstein > >Received on Wed Oct 23 2013 - 16:28:24 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:40:43 UTC