David Miller wrote:
quoted text
> Arjan, by definition the firmware has to be tied to the kernel somehow.
> THe datastructure and other aspects are often tied directly to
> the firmware version loaded.

agreed that there are cases like this, and I have no personal objection to having
those in the kernel.

quoted text
> If debian or whoever else have these concernes and want to rip the
> firmware out, it is one hundred percent their problem to patch things
> out of the kernel tree they use.

I don't care at all about the argument from that camp.


My aim was more the opposite: be able to get MORE firmware easily used/loaded,
not less. Right now it's a royal pain for users to get all the right pieces of
firmware.... having ONE place to put all that would go a long way of making that
side of things easier.

If you want to argue that that should be in the kernel tarbal itself, you won't
hear me complain. But others will... and for that a 2nd tarbal might well be the answer.
Just we shouldn't need 100 tarbals.
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/