PDA

View Full Version : Linus is pissed!!!



greggh
December 15th, 2006, 02:29 AM
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/475654/focus=475824


...
So go get it merged in the Ubuntu, (Open)SuSE and RHEL and Fedora trees
first. This is not something where we use my tree as a way to get it to
other trees. This is something where the push had better come from the
other direction.

Because I think it's stupid. So use somebody else than me to push your
political agendas, please.

Linus

PriceChild
December 15th, 2006, 02:40 AM
Wow...

I've got to say I love that entire post.

+1 from me.

Pricey

MetalMusicAddict
December 15th, 2006, 02:41 AM
This is actually been covered in 2 other threads and is a non-issue now because the patch was withdrawn. :)

greggh
December 15th, 2006, 02:55 AM
This is actually been covered in 2 other threads and is a non-issue now because the patch was withdrawn. :)

I didn't know that the patch was withdrawn. Could you please link me to an article that says the patch was withdrwan? Thanks.

MetalMusicAddict
December 15th, 2006, 02:57 AM
Look at the 1st post. http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=318417


"I'll go delete that module.c patch from my tree now."

greggh
December 15th, 2006, 03:04 AM
Look at the 1st post. http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=318417


"I'll go delete that module.c patch from my tree now."

Thanks.

givré
December 15th, 2006, 03:21 AM
http://beranger.org/?article=2132

Even more clear like that.

darkhatter
December 15th, 2006, 03:21 AM
Linus is a good leader, I have no worries about Linux. To think I was actually looking BSD a couple of hours ago...

usernamebob
December 15th, 2006, 04:34 AM
Yay for Linus!

IYY
December 15th, 2006, 04:38 AM
Linus always behaves like this. I think he called Gnome "retarded" once.

RAV TUX
December 15th, 2006, 05:16 AM
I have a higher respect for Linus, after reading this. The man is pure genius!


From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds <at> osdl.org>
Subject: Re: GPL only modules [was Re: [GIT PATCH] more Driver core patches for 2.6.19] (http://news.gmane.org/find-root.php?message_id=%3cPine.LNX.4.64.0612131954530 .5718%40woody.osdl.org%3e)
Newsgroups: gmane.linux.kernel (http://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel)
Date: 2006-12-14 04:15:59 GMT (23 hours and 56 minutes ago)
On Wed, 13 Dec 2006, Greg KH wrote:
>
> Numerous kernel developers feel that loading non-GPL drivers into the
> kernel violates the license of the kernel and their copyright. Because
> of this, a one year notice for everyone to address any non-GPL
> compatible modules has been set.

Btw, I really think this is shortsighted.

It will only result in _exactly_ the crap we were just trying to avoid,
namely stupid "shell game" drivers that don't actually help anything at
all, and move code into user space instead.

What was the point again?

Was the point to alienate people by showing how we're less about the
technology than about licenses?

Was the point to show that we think we can extend our reach past derived
work boundaries by just saying so?

The silly thing is, the people who tend to push most for this are the
exact SAME people who say that the RIAA etc should not be able to tell
people what to do with the music copyrights that they own, and that the
DMCA is bad because it puts technical limits over the rights expressly
granted by copyright law.

Doesn't anybody else see that as being hypocritical?

So it's ok when we do it, but bad when other people do it? Somehow I'm not
surprised, but I still think it's sad how you guys are showing a marked
two-facedness about this.

The fact is, the reason I don't think we should force the issue is very
simple: copyright law is simply _better_off_ when you honor the admittedly
gray issue of "derived work". It's gray. It's not black-and-white. But
being gray is _good_. Putting artificial black-and-white technical
counter-measures is actually bad. It's bad when the RIAA does it, it's bad
when anybody else does it.

If a module arguably isn't a derived work, we simply shouldn't try to say
that its authors have to conform to our worldview.

We should make decisions on TECHNICAL MERIT. And this one is clearly being
pushed on anything but.

I happen to believe that there shouldn't be technical measures that keep
me from watching my DVD or listening to my music on whatever device I damn
well please. Fair use, man. But it should go the other way too: we should
not try to assert _our_ copyright rules on other peoples code that wasn't
derived from ours, or assert _our_ technical measures that keep people
from combining things their way.

If people take our code, they'd better behave according to our rules. But
we shouldn't have to behave according to the RIAA rules just because we
_listen_ to their music. Similarly, nobody should be forced to behave
according to our rules just because they _use_ our system.

There's a big difference between "copy" and "use". It's exatcly the same
issue whether it's music or code. You can't re-distribute other peoples
music (becuase it's _their_ copyright), but they shouldn't put limits on
how you personally _use_ it (because it's _your_ life).

Same goes for code. Copyright is about _distribution_, not about use. We
shouldn't limit how people use the code.

Oh, well. I realize nobody is likely going to listen to me, and everybody
has their opinion set in stone.

That said, I'm going to suggest that you people talk to your COMPANY
LAWYERS on this, and I'm personally not going to merge that particular
code unless you can convince the people you work for to merge it first.

In other words, you guys know my stance. I'll not fight the combined
opinion of other kernel developers, but I sure as hell won't be the first
to merge this, and I sure as hell won't have _my_ tree be the one that
causes this to happen.

So go get it merged in the Ubuntu, (Open)SuSE and RHEL and Fedora trees
first. This is not something where we use my tree as a way to get it to
other trees. This is something where the push had better come from the
other direction.

Because I think it's stupid. So use somebody else than me to push your
political agendas, please.

Linus

Polygon
December 15th, 2006, 06:07 AM
ive also heard that he hates gnome, just because they limit you on a lot of stuff that you can config (screensavers is one example) while kde is the other extreme and you can basically change literally EVERYTHING and there are options galore.

DoctorMO
December 15th, 2006, 06:24 AM
Linus has lost points with me for the kind of reply, it wasn't very smart and he didn't really grasp what he was trying to say very well.

23meg
December 15th, 2006, 06:30 AM
This kind of thing is usual between kernel developers; no need to idolize or disrespect them based on this discussion. A quote I like from a talk by Andrew Morton puts it in perspective in a funny way:
Well, there's no such thing as an official position in Linux.
Linus has opinions, I have opinions, everyone else has opinions. The only
consistency here is that most of us are wrong most of the time. Everyone is
free to disagree, and because all of us have so little invested in a
particular position, we are always open to argument. As usual the only
limiting factor here is that ultimately we all run out of bandwidth to
listen to opinions, and the person with the simplest argument which requires
least bandwidth to communicate often wins out.

hardyn
December 15th, 2006, 08:10 AM
Question about Linus and Linux...

It it awsome how hands-on Linus has remained with his "child", and i am glad that their is somebody still "parenting" this project. But as with any "family", at some point biology will take over, it's something that every child has to face at some point in their life; Will at some point will Linux be mature enough to set out on the world by its self? May it possiblity fall into the wrong crowd and become wayward if not as lovingly guided by "dad"? does the Linux project have an heir?

dvarsam
December 15th, 2006, 12:47 PM
Hello!

I am supporting Linus!
I am on his side!


Personally I'd be sad if nVidia stopped producing updates to their binary drivers, but I'd be glad in a way because the free version would get quite a lot of support after the initial set back. and it wouldn't be the end of the world, just the start of a different one.

If we allow Proprietary Drivers to come into Linux, then no Open Source projects will continue to exist!

And even worse:

IF we allow critical Proprietary Software like the above Nvidia drives to be implemented, then other programs, to cooperate better with the Nvidia drivers will have to change their code....
... And if Nvidia one day decides to quit the whole idea of making drivers for Linux....
... A whole bunch of Programs will cease to work too!!!

We are going to have a "Domino" Effect!

IMHO:
It should be Permitted for Companies to Create Closed Source Software for Linux, as long as they do not steal code from Open Source, and as long as Open Source alternative Software exist to do the same kind of work!
If we allow Closed Source Software to borrow code from Open Source, then:
1. They will produce no work from their side,
2. They will just copy & paste Open Source code into their products,
3. They will just make some fancy changes & add a few more features,
4. They will sell their products to all of us, and
5. They will make money from somebody else's work!


Closed Source & Open Source are enemies of each other!
If one wins, the other dies...
And usually the "weaker" dies...
And the weaker is "Open Source".

Linux Gurus please "think" of where you are heading to...

Thanks.

P.S.1> Has anybody seen the film "Mother Teresa"?
This reminds me of her (e.g. the film)...
Everybody tried to take advantage of her...
I feel as if everybody is trying to push "Linus" out of the game...
It is like: "thank you for your contribution & goodbye!"...
P.S.2> As somebody else has suggested, the best thing to do is give the user the choice to select the drivers he would like to install during the installation process - select either:
1. Nvidia (Closed Source)
2. Open Source alternative.
This last is the best approach!!!
(People with wide screen Laptops, who have problems with their Resolutions will choose the Nvidia drivers - when necessary - to solve their problems & all the rest without any problems will choose the Open Source alternative.)

Macintosh Sauce
December 15th, 2006, 01:05 PM
The Linux GPL3 fanatics are going to insure that Linux is never accepted by the general computing population.

mushroom
December 15th, 2006, 01:22 PM
If we allow Proprietary Drivers to come into Linux, then no Open Source projects will continue to exist!

And even worse:

IF we allow critical Proprietary Software like the above Nvidia drives to be implemented, then other programs, to cooperate better with the Nvidia drivers will have to change their code....
... And if Nvidia one day decides to quit the whole idea of making drivers for Linux....
... A whole bunch of Programs will cease to work too!!!

We are going to have a "Domino" Effect!



If you're a sane developer, you will not create software that depends on the existence of one driver. Also, just because a company releases closed drivers for Linux doesn't mean that effort to create free ones will cease. Calm down, you're looking too much into it. No "domino effect" will take place because of a few non-free drivers; it should and will always be an option, and that's what freedom is.

Hex_Mandos
December 15th, 2006, 01:47 PM
To fight for free drivers we need a larger userbase (aka market for hardware vendors). To get a larger userbase, we need to solve some of Linux' perennial problems, such as hardware support and user friendliness. And including binary drivers would help solve them, I think.

We can allow binary drivers for now. We'll eventually grow strong enough to pressure hardware companies, but this is not the moment. Remember that for most people (particularly Windows users we should try to convert) an OS is a tool, a means to an end. They couldn't care less for philosophy. And they're the ones we should try to convince to switch: the hardcore FLOSSers are already using Linux (or GNU/Hurd, or some BSD, or whatever), so we can't make gains in THAT direction.

az
December 15th, 2006, 02:57 PM
Wow...

I've got to say I love that entire post.

+1 from me.

Pricey

Ubuntu's kernel guy Ben Collins said:
"Don't get me wrong, I'm not bashing reverse engineering, or writing our
own drivers. It's how Linux got started. But the problem isn't as narrow
as people would like to think. And proprietary code isn't a growing
problem. At best, it's just a distraction that will eventually go away
on it's own.

The whole hardware vendor landscape is showing this, and it's not
because we locked down the kernel, it's because we've shown how well we
play with others, and how easy it is to get along with the whole
community. Do we want to destroy this good will?"

angkor
December 15th, 2006, 03:15 PM
Closed Source & Open Source are enemies of each other!

No they're not, they're just two different models of software development. No enemies, no war, guns etc.

23meg
December 15th, 2006, 03:26 PM
I am supporting Linus!
I am on his side!The rest of your post doesn't confirm that though.

greggh
December 15th, 2006, 09:02 PM
The rest of your post doesn't confirm that though.

Yeah, it sounded like he was on the exact opposite side of Linus.

OffHand
December 15th, 2006, 09:26 PM
Yeah, it sounded like he was on the exact opposite side of Linus.

Cool. I thought I was missing something because of a language barrier. (I'm not a native English speaker.)

yabbadabbadont
December 15th, 2006, 10:19 PM
Cool. I thought I was missing something because of a language barrier. (I'm not a native English speaker.)

It didn't sound like he was either. Maybe he misinterpreted what Linus said in the LKML?