From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Johannes Weiner Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Release plans Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2008 14:27:07 +0200 Message-ID: <87prob7pes.fsf@skyscraper.fehenstaub.lan> References: <10697146.3630221218551689983.JavaMail.www@wwinf4615> <20080814103040.GB2593@muc.de> <87y72z7t3c.fsf@skyscraper.fehenstaub.lan> <200808141344.26855.tassilo@member.fsf.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1218716944 28889 80.91.229.12 (14 Aug 2008 12:29:04 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2008 12:29:04 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Tassilo Horn Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Aug 14 14:29:56 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1KTbxc-0007kH-S2 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 14 Aug 2008 14:29:49 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55563 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KTbwg-0004yP-D0 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 14 Aug 2008 08:28:50 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KTbvS-0004Q6-Sr for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 14 Aug 2008 08:27:35 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KTbvQ-0004Os-GU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 14 Aug 2008 08:27:33 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=42661 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KTbvQ-0004Ok-BP for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 14 Aug 2008 08:27:32 -0400 Original-Received: from saeurebad.de ([85.214.36.134]:42245) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KTbvP-0002g4-TH for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 14 Aug 2008 08:27:32 -0400 Original-Received: by saeurebad.de (Postfix, from userid 107) id 8E5802F00CA; Thu, 14 Aug 2008 14:27:30 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from localhost (83-221-69-159.dynamic.primacom.net [83.221.69.159]) by saeurebad.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB1092F00C4; Thu, 14 Aug 2008 14:27:29 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <200808141344.26855.tassilo@member.fsf.org> (Tassilo Horn's message of "Thu, 14 Aug 2008 13:44:26 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux) X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.1.3 X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:102444 Archived-At: Hi Tassilo, Tassilo Horn writes: > On Thursday 14 August 2008 13:07:35 Johannes Weiner wrote: > > Hi Hannes, > >> Neither the Linux kernel, nor I as a free user who chooses not to load >> proprietary bullcrap into it, have been harmed by the kernel's >> mechanism to load said bullcrap. > > That needs not to be true. Take the nvidia drivers as an example. If > the kernel wouldn't allow this driver to be loaded, we might have a > better free driver today. Who knows? It seems to solve itself evolutionary. nvidia sucks so bad at keeping up with the kernel api, left aside frequent, undebuggable oopsen, that I know quite some people who's subsequent video card has been an ATI card just because there are now free drivers available. I myself have an nvidia card due to historic reasons which I can not fully utilize because I decided to not use the nvidia driver. But as soon I have enough money for an upgrade, I will sure as hell get a video card that is supported by free drivers. And in my case, this is not only a technical decision. When someone asks me for help with their kernel becoming unstable after loading proprietary modules, I explain them that it's neither the kernels fault, nor the module-vendors fault. It's the person's fault who made the decision. Noone `subjugated' a user of the proprietary nvidia module. Only their own stupidity. > The same applies to the intel wireless drivers, which require some > proprietary firmware. If something works, the attraction of > implementing a free alternative fades away. I consider ath5k and the ati drivers proving the opposite. I think Richard has yet another wireless card that works with free drivers. I actually see a trend in free drivers evolving. > Of course you can argue the other way round, too. Would GNU/Linux be > where it is today if no proprietary drivers allowed most features of the > computer to be used? I don't know. But are there so many proprietary modules at all? I believe there are by far more free modules than non-free ones for the kernel. And even if I would myself not do so, I would prefer a user running a complete GNU/Linux system with one proprietary module loaded to get his work done over him running a completely non-free environment. You can still fight the remaining evil. And I consider myself as a proof that the figthing spirit is not lost just because there is a working non-free module available. Hannes