On Thursday 02 August 2007, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: > On Thu, 2007-08-02 at 20:05 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > sounds good to me ... so to tie back to the source of the thread, crappy > > closed source vendor drivers are not a valid reason to hold up > > stabilization of a kernel > > Who ever said they were crappy? Maybe the documentation on usage is > crappy, but drivers have consistently gotten much better. These days > pretty solid IMHO for my uses.
last time i used the drivers they sucked hard ... maybe it's gotten better; i dont know -- i tossed all my ati in favor of nvidia my point though wasnt to knock ati (although it was fun), the point was that i do not believe any closed source driver in our tree should ever be grounds for preventing stabilization of a kernel ebuild so next time dsd (or whoever the ninja kernel maintainer happens to be at the time) says "hey i plan on stabilizing Linux x.y.z" and someone goes "wait, you cant until we get <closed source driver package foo> working", the reply is of course "blow it out your arse^H^H^H^Htalk to the package maintainer, this will not hold up stabilization efforts" -mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
