On Saturday 20 November 2010 15:51:51 Andrew Lynn wrote: > On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 8:08 AM, Narendra Sisodiya > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 5:37 PM, Nagarjuna G <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I do not agree that we should look at linux kernel website to > >> look for hardware compatibility. We should look at librelinux > >> site. this is because linux kernel is no longer a free > >> software. It contains lots of binary blobs. It is not even > >> open source. More and more binary blobs are being added in each > >> of the new releases. This is a serious issue. as a result > >> fully free distributions like Trisquel, which use librelinux, do > >> not run on most hardware. > > The Linux kernel is the defacto standard for GNU/Linux OS'. We > should see that policy does not choke applications that depend on > hardware for which no open standards exist.
It is NOT the defacto standard for hardware. Common sense dictates that the hardware interface specs be open so that you can write drivers. So why do mfgs dont do that? after all they want drivers for their hardware. Because every new hardware has horrifying bugs and design flaws that are soundly berated by driver writers, particularly FOSS writers eg. Itanic. An NDA ensures that all such criticisms are censored. And experience shows that vendor blobs suffer from bitrot. just check the old ATI and NVIDIA drivers. So the vendor walks away with the loot while the purchaser is hding the baby. > > > +1 > > Or, we can just say > > Govt must follow these rules > > 1. Govt should produce/create/modify a base linux Linux Distro > > which must be fully GPL like Trisquel , it can start supporting > > BOSS/SchoolOS etc 2. Govt must impose a criteria on hardware > > guys, "before selling any hardware, show that it work well on at > > GNU/Linux OS from rule number 1" > > BOSS is developed and supported by Govt, and besides the i...@school > project in Kerala, have recently won an award for installation and > support on 46,000 machines in Punjab. BTW - this won because the > cost of support was Rs 50/- per machine v/s MS charge of ~1K. > > This suggestion works for me, but does not really put pressure to > hasten the adoption of open standards in hardware. > > > So even if govt is incapable of supporting its OS, Hardware guys > > will imporve it for their sells. > > May be someother tricky solution. As I told, even if the hardware > > vendors specify the specification, kernel.org is sufficient to > > create all drivers.. How we can impose such criteria? What Govt > > agencies are responsible for controlling nuisance of hardware > > vendor ? Any existing Law ? > > Affecting procurement in Govt. is best done by influencing the > rate contracts - such as DGS&D and NICSI. There is a FOSS cell in > the Ministry of Communication and Information Technology . As DIT > would be responsible for formulating such policy, this would > probably be the best place to forward your suggestions. This could certainly be one of the tracks. -- Rgds JTD _______________________________________________ network mailing list [email protected] http://lists.fosscom.in/listinfo.cgi/network-fosscom.in
