On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 09:13:20AM -0500, Shawn Walker wrote: > On 9/7/05, Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Well, it is a well defined API for third party modules. and you are supposed > > to follow the rules, or expect random breakage all over. This is the same on > > any kernel out there (solaris, microsoft, whatever) and a rule driver > > writers > > have to conform too. > > The problem is that it is only well defined for each release. The > following release may suddenly decide to change the licesne of a > "well-defined API" such that you can no longer use it.
Well, indeed, as windows has been known to change or modify the driver API unilaterally, so what else is new ? And it is GPLed software, so you are free to start from the old code base and do your own stuff. Notice that the only reason the above would be unmodifiable is if the new release where to include new GPLed code the author doesn't want to be linked with non-GPL-compatible modules. Also notice that most of the above complains probably come because in older linux kernel releases the well defined API was not so clearly delimited, and this was changed during the 2.6 release cycle. > > This is not a licencing problem, but a discipline and conformance to API > > problem. I suppose if driver writers are unhappy with some of the API, they > > can voice their opinion on LKML, and request a modification of the module > > visible API, the same as if someone was writing drivers for proprietary > > kernels, could ask for an API modification. > > It's still somewhat a licensing problem... Well, yes, but a legitimate one, so a feature, and not a problem. Friendly, Sven Luther _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
