Re: GPL vs non-GPL device drivers

["Michael K. Edwards" <medwards.linux@gmail.com>]

On 2/22/07, Alan <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
> > compiler people caught on to the economic opportunity.  Ever pay $5K
> > for a CD full of GNU binaries for a commercial UNIX?  I did, after
>
> No because I just downloaded them. Much easier and since they are GPL I
> was allowed to do so, then rebuilt them all which took about 30 minutes
> of brain time and a day of CPU time.

Oh yeah?  For IRIX in 1991?  Or for that matter, for Linux/ARM EABI
today?  Tell me, how many of what sort of users do you support
singlehandedly in an environment where you are a minority architecture
and everyone else takes the GNU tools for granted?  God knows I've got
better things to do with my time than roll the compiler-flag dice
again and again trying to get a sketchy GCC port not to ICE or, worse,
generate subtly broken code.  If it's so bloody easy, how do
CodeSourcery and MontaVista and Red Hat stay in business?  Not with
the quality of their code or their customer service, I'll tell you
that -- although Mark Mitchell is probably the best release manager
that any GNU project has ever had.

> <Balmer impersonation deleted>

Oh, please.  Steve Ballmer doesn't waste his time trying to explain to
overpaid GNU/Linux Morlocks (among which I number myself) how the
legal and economic underpinnings of their industry work and why they
shouldn't RAPE THEMSELVES playing stupid EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL games and
cryptographically signing kernel modules.  But don't worry -- neither
do I beyond a couple of weeks after something really dunderheaded sets
me off, and in the meantime, you know where to find your keyboard's
"stick my fingers in my ears and shout la-la-la-I-can't-hear-you" key.
 :-)

Cheers,
- Michael