Linux device driver project needs more unsupported devices to work on?

[Chris Gehlker]

On Oct 28, 2007, at 1:00 PM, Dazed_75 wrote:
>
>
> So his grammar is not correct.  Blogs (where that came from
> originally) are full of mis-statements due to bad grammar.  It seems
> to be a growing trend unfortunately.  OTOH, I think you can read what
> he says in the way that you say is correct.  Especially in a case like
> nvidia where they tend to make drivers that support all there products
> (can we all spell "bloat"?).  In any case, that seems like a nit to
> me.

I think it's more than a grammatical nit. The  trust of the article is  
'Isn't it ironic that many people complain about Linux driver support  
when The Linux Driver Project is looking for work'. But indeed much of  
the complaining concerns ATI and nVidia. The author know this but he  
tries to sweep it under the rug with  some verbal sleight of hand  
about "only two video cards". Personally, I don't think technical  
articles benefit from manufactured drama.
>
>
>> supported' mean that the default Ubuntu install will auto-detect it
>> and do the right thing or does it mean that there is source code out
>> there somewhere for those who know how  to compile and install it? it
>> strikes me that there might be a long way between the driver project
>> and and the common distros.
>
> Agreed.  On the other hand, if you go back to their foundations, the
> project is aimed at enusring that drivers for hardware EXIST for
> Linux, not that the drivers are FOSS or incorporated into distros.
> Sure, that may be an end goal even in that project, but it is not the
> priority 1 goal.

I meant no criticism of the project. I think they are doing a great  
job. I only  mean to point out that their is a lag between when the   
drivers are written and when they become  accessible to Joe Sixpack.

--
Seven Deadly Sins? I thought it was a to-do list!