Hello from Gregg C Levine normally with Jedi Knight Computers Say..... Didn't I just throw that one up into the air, regarding Slackware? Still Rick has a heck of good point, we should be discussing this like professionals, and not flaming everyone, just because that person, may, or may not be right. Anyway, I may not agree with the decision to release a driver, only in the form of OCO, but it make sense, somewhere. And not just flapping in the wind either. ------------------- Gregg C Levine [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------------------------------------ "The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi "Use the Force, Luke." Obi-Wan Kenobi (This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi ) (This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda )
> -----Original Message----- > From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of > Rick Troth > Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2001 8:57 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: LCS drivers for 2.4.9 ? > > > No vendor ships Linus base kernel. Linus base kernel doesn't pass anyones > > QA test suite. Linus role is to put out clean well designed code and to > > ensure development takes the right paths. The vendors then all add on > > top of that various things including bug fixes which while they may fix > > the bug are not the right long term solution and so won't go into Linus > > tree. > > True: No vendor ships Linus base kernel. HOWEVER, > there may be "non vendor" distros which use the base kernel, > and (more to the point) there are customers who can and do, > and some say should, build their own kernel, which would be base. > Personally, I always run my own kernel on RH, SuSE, Slackware, > whether that be INTeL, S/390, or something else. > > But we're getting off-topic w/r/t the thread and subject > to criticize RH, SuSE, Turbo for distributing customized kernels. > Several clearer heads have already chimed in: > > o the differing business models > will always be incompatible in the extreme > > o IBM evidently has issues other than the driver code itself > that prevent it releasing the driver code source > (think about it; think about how an unscrupulous lawyer might > might twist the positive precedent of releasing source into a > less-business-friendly argument about dissolving the patent) > > o IBM, RedHat, (indeed, BMC!) > do not love their customers per se > Thankfully, there are those within IBM, RedHat, > (indeed, within BMC!) who recognize that > customer relationships have more lasting value > than intellectual property, and some genuinely love > their customers for more than money. > > The second bullet there I think is the crux of this matter. > And the statement doesn't *solve* the problem, but neither does > the word war we've waged. Work the problem. > > Folks, we need to think carefully. Nothing wrong with argument. > Just be constructive. Doesn't matter whether it's Alan Cox > or Alan Altmark, each man has gotta eat. Argue productively. > > -- > Rick Troth, BMC Software, Inc. > 2101 City West Blvd., Houston, Texas, USA, 77042 1-800-841-2031
