> developement, when you think about it, the linux kernel is > developed by a small close knit group, so like the MS > kernel you can't really have a chance at modding it so > why bother, whats left? the gui and apps, you can mod the
Cobblers... :-). Point in case.. I've been on and off mucking around with webcams, and chose a Creative Webcam 5, only problem is the kernel module (pwc) sends the image to the client apps reversed (horizontally flipped as in). Originally I patched the source for the client app, but found that limited my playing to just that app, so off to the kernel source.. After much mucking about I've modified the kernel module code to flip the image when it finds the USB ID for the Creative Webcam 5. Works a treat. Although it's not likely 99.99% of the users of linux would ever consider changing the kernel source, they can. This is a major difference from MS where if you have a bit of hardware that dosn't work due to core OS problems, that's it. Too bad, try a different vendors product. I intend to send the code change back to the maintainer as well, which might make it into the main kernel tree, who knows, but it's an oppertunity that certainly wouldn't be available under a confentional proprietory model. The 'close knit group' that filter what makes it into the kernel certainly may be small, but the total number of kernel contributors by now must be huge. Take a look at CREDITS and MAINTAINERS in the root of the source tree. Those are only partial lists. Blah Blah Blah.. :-). Cheers, Chris H.
