Peter Jeremy wrote:
On Tue, 2006-Jul-18 22:11:45 -0300, Charles A. Landemaine wrote:
Aside from the fact that some vendors don't cooperate to release
hardware specifications, is there something we could do to revert this
situation?
I suspect the major problems are lack of interface documentation for
the various chips and non-compliance with standards on things like
ACPI. I don't believe there's a general solution to the problem,
rather work-arounds need to be developed on a case-by-case basis.
How could the community act to change things?
Getting action from vendors has been unsuccessful in the past - the
Free OS community (Linux + *BSD) is too small for vendors to be
concerned about.
I cannot agree with you. Linux has achieved much more support from
hardware vendors than FreeBSD. You may look in Linux source code.
In linux-2.6.x/drivers/, there are so many hardware drivers.
On the other hand, so many hardware vendors (especially some small
enterprises, which are eager to obtain software support)
have publicized data sheets of their integrated circuit products,
but so few people would write hardware driver for FreeBSD.
I suspect the best solution is to publicise configurations that are
known to work and what problems exist with other configurations.
--
Peter Jeremy
FreeBSD must be more open than before. Otherwise, it will lose
developping energy/vitality and fall behind the time.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From Beijing, China
_______________________________________________
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
