Messages in this thread | | | From | "Stefan Monnier" <monnier+lists/linux/kernel/news/@tequila.cs.yale.edu> | Subject | Re: [Re: Linux headed for disaster?] -- I don't think so. | Date | 05 Dec 1999 19:32:24 -0500 |
| |
>>>>> "Kendall" == Kendall Bennett <KendallB@scitechsoft.com> writes: > One thing that everyone seems to be confusing here is that > binary portable modules == proprietry close source drivers
Think about it some more: if you have the source code for it, why would you bother with the trouble of providing binary compatibility ? Just replace
cp foomodule.bin /lib/modules/<vers>/misc with modcompile foomodule.src; cp foomodule.bin /lib/modules/<vers>/misc
That's it. Now, is that easier than designing a API and keeping it up-to-date and dealing with backward compatibility and with compatibility issues between different compilation options, ... ?
Sure binary compatibility is not evil in itself, but unless you have a closed code driver, the benefits are really very slim so they'd better come at "no cost" or close enough. If you can solve all those problems and provide binary compatibility with no noticeable performance penalty and no maintainability problem, I'm sure you can get Linus to use it. But don't expect him to work on such an insignificant "problem" when much more productive work can be done in plenty of other areas.
Stefan
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |