On 15-07-08 04:24, David Miller wrote:

quoted text
> From: Rene Herman <rene.herman@keyaccess.nl>
> Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2008 04:23:14 +0200
> 
>> On 15-07-08 03:52, David Miller wrote:
>>
>>> From: david@lang.hm Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2008 17:51:37 -0700 (PDT)
>>>
>>>> I agree with this, but the proponents of the seperate firmware are
>>>> listing the fact that the firmware doesn't tie up ram as one of the
>>>> big reasons for making the change.
>>> Exactly.
>>>
>>> Otherwise these firmware changes are utterly pointless.
>> The point of them is legal.
> 
> Thanks for proving something I tried to establish for weeks
> but which Alan Cox, David W., and others vehemently denied.
> 
> They states that it was being done on a technical basis rather
> than being predominantly a legal one.

Yes, they were obstinate or dishonest (I won't say "respectively"). As 
to "proving" though, I cannot prove anything, being a mere observer.

At this point I really believe this discussion should be about the other 
part of my reply -- the point mostly put forward by Jef Garzik about the 
firmware inside the module image. Without that ability, I don't believe 
these are good patches.

_With_ that ability, I myself do. Let's allow allow everyone their own 
level of fear, uncertainty and doubt.

Rene

--
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/