Darren J Moffat wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >>> On Wednesday 31 January 2007 02:17 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >>> >>>> I see you carefully neglected the first of these two points. >>> >>> I didn't *carefully* neglect it.;-) >>> >>>> It's all fine and good if GLPv3 allows device driver linking >>>> explicitely, >>>> but what if the main source of GPL'ed drivers remains GPLv2? >>> >>> This could be a reality, but I suspect once the GPLv3 is out, there >>> will be a following to support it. Certainly time will show-all. >> >> >> Which is why "now" is probably the wrong time to make any decision >> about GPLv3. >> >> I see no benefit in us being early adopters; if there is movement, e.g., >> a movement to accept GPLv3 drivers into Linux and a subsequent hint of >> convergence between *BSD and Linux device drivers, then that would >> be the time to jump on the bandwagon. But only when it is a bandwagon. > > > Why oh why do so many people seem to believe that the license is the > biggest issue in "porting" Linux kernel device drivers to OpenSolaris ? > > There are huge technical issues as well- and they are (or should be!) > much more interesting! > >From the few I've studied, porting = rewrite!
Ian _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list [email protected]
