[linux-usb-devel] Re: [BK PATCH] USB patches for 2.6.9-rc1

2004-08-27 Thread Greg KH
On Fri, Aug 27, 2004 at 11:30:04AM -0700, Craig Milo Rogers wrote: > On 04.08.26, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Craig Milo Rogers wrote: > > > > > On 04.08.26, Greg KH wrote: > > > > Greg Kroah-Hartman: > > > > o USB: rip out the whole pwc driver as the author wishes to have don

[linux-usb-devel] Re: [BK PATCH] USB patches for 2.6.9-rc1

2004-08-26 Thread Linus Torvalds
On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > At no point was it a legal argument. In fact, since none of the people > involved were layers, you shouldn't even try to _make_ it a legal > arguments. Before somebody points out that I do legal arguments too, I just wish to say - sometimes you

[linux-usb-devel] Re: [BK PATCH] USB patches for 2.6.9-rc1

2004-08-26 Thread Linus Torvalds
On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Craig Milo Rogers wrote: > On 04.08.26, Greg KH wrote: > > Greg Kroah-Hartman: > > o USB: rip out the whole pwc driver as the author wishes to have done > > o USB: rip the pwc decompressor hooks out of the kernel, as they are a GPL > > violation > > The decompres

[linux-usb-devel] Re: [BK PATCH] USB patches for 2.6.9-rc1

2004-08-26 Thread Linus Torvalds
On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Eric St-Laurent wrote: > > I understand the need to remove the decompressors hooks, i can live with > the inconveniences for the time being. I think everybody can understand that part. > However, i think that the GPL pwc driver should stay in, regardless of > the author op

[linux-usb-devel] Re: [BK PATCH] USB patches for 2.6.9-rc1

2004-08-26 Thread Eric St-Laurent
On Thu, 2004-08-26 at 22:28, Andrew Morton wrote: > In this case, special-purpose hooks for a binary-only module are a no-no. > > Leaning on the binary driver vendor is the best approach although speaking > realistically, someone needs to get down and implement a driver which uses > the normal k

[linux-usb-devel] Re: [BK PATCH] USB patches for 2.6.9-rc1

2004-08-26 Thread Eric St-Laurent
On Thu, 2004-08-26 at 22:28, Andrew Morton wrote: > In this case, special-purpose hooks for a binary-only module are a no-no. I understand the need to remove the decompressors hooks, i can live with the inconveniences for the time being. However, i think that the GPL pwc driver should stay in,

[linux-usb-devel] Re: [BK PATCH] USB patches for 2.6.9-rc1

2004-08-26 Thread Andrew Morton
Eric St-Laurent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > As a owner of two webcams that uses this driver, i hate seeing this be > removed. Well yeah. Everybody hates seeing functionality which is useful to people go away. But the license has served us well thus far and if we're to go bending further than

[linux-usb-devel] Re: [BK PATCH] USB patches for 2.6.9-rc1

2004-08-26 Thread Eric St-Laurent
On Thu, 2004-08-26 at 19:52, Greg KH wrote: > There are a number of USB OTG driver additions here, firmware updates > for the edgeport drivers, lots of bugfixes, shrinkage of the struct urb > structure, and sadly, the removal of the PWC video camera driver (as per > the driver author's wishes, it