Thu Jun 3 12:41:23 EDT 2004
Bob Ippolito wrote:
> On Jun 3, 2004, at 10:11 AM, mlists at bizintegrators.com wrote:
>>>> I'm very gratefull for OpenBSD's integrity, meaning things like binary
>>>> only drivers will never be accepted.
>>> I don't see how this is true.
>>> Sure binary only modules may not be possible, but binary only
>>> patches are
>>> very much possible. Additionally thanks to the liberal BSD license,
>>> becomes more so possible as opposed to the requirements of the GPL.
>> I think binary patches and binary kernel modules are very different.
>> Unless there is a source, or it complies with OpenBSD goals, they will
>> not accept anything kernel or userland related. Even with source, and a
>> bad license, they will not accept it. This is what I meant when I said
>> the above.
>> Binary patches patch already what is in the system. My comment only
>> related to things like binary-only NV drivers, for example.
> I don't get what you're trying to say here. Linux won't accept kernel
> modules and patches that aren't GPL either, but it just so happens
> that there are third parties that provide a few binary only drivers.
actually the kernel will accept non-GPL'd lkm's, it will just "taint"
the kernel and tell you about that at boot time. the nvidia drivers are
not GPL'd for example.
> In the case of OpenBSD, you just don't have any interested third
> parties (that I'm aware of).
i don't think the OpenBSD folks want anything to do with non-open source
drivers for various reasons. in any event it's 6 or one 1/2 a dozen of
email: pete at nomadlogic.org
More information about the talk