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

[Darrin Chandler]

If you don't care about free as in speech, but only about free as in
beer, delete this now.

On Sun, Oct 28, 2007 at 10:56:54AM -0700, Dazed_75 wrote:
> I don't know about the rest of you, but this came as a surprise to me:
> 
> http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS6669895837.html
> 
> except for the part about hardware vendors not wanting to open up.
> But then isn't that a big part of the reason for the existence of the
> project?  Surely we all hope the hardware vendors would go fully open
> source but do not expect them all to do it.  I believe the project was
> created not just to create new code from specs provided by
> manufacturers but to also sometimes have to reverse engineer them as
> has been done in the past.
> 
> Thats why I don't quite understand the "lack of work to give them"
> statement.  OTOH, existing driver support is hugely better than it was
> a few years ago so I can easily see that as part of the reason.  Sure
> is good to see the project thriving though.

That project is not good for open source / free software. Every time a
developer signs an NDA to get specs they hurt the cause. It's not just
that they don't help freedom, they actively hurt it by telling vendors
that it's fine to keep specs locked up. The resulting drivers are not
truly free and open, because by NDA they must keep some things secret.
The source may be open, but it's essentially obfuscated and therefore
difficult or impossible to maintain by anyone who hasn't also signed an
NDA.

The less this project has going on, the more likely I will have quality
support for my hardware.

-- 
Darrin Chandler            |  Phoenix BSD User Group  |  MetaBUG
dwchandler at stilyagin.com   |  http://phxbug.org/      |  http://metabug.org/
http://www.stilyagin.com/  |  Daemons in the Desert   |  Global BUG Federation