Because the Linux stuff is mostly very GPL.
On Oct 23, 2013 2:15 PM, "Alfred Perlstein" <bri...@mu.org> wrote:
> On 10/23/13 11:11 AM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
>> On 23 October 2013 11:09, Alfred Perlstein <bri...@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
>>>> test bwl changes. The NDIS thing is a bit hackish, but it is quite
>>>> 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
email@example.com mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-wireless-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"