[3334] in linux-net channel archive
Re: Binary Driver Issues
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (shaggenbunsenburner)
Wed Jun 19 16:52:21 1996
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 10:47:52 -0400 (EDT)
From: shaggenbunsenburner <shagboy@thecia.net>
Reply-To: shagboy@thecia.net
To: Dennis <dennis@etinc.com>
cc: Mike Kilburn <mike@lserv.conexio.co.za>, linux-net@vger.rutgers.edu
In-Reply-To: <199606181505.LAA03324@etinc.com>
On Tue, 18 Jun 1996, Dennis wrote:
> >I strongly belive companies which use Linux for a profit should give
> >something back, this is one of the reasons for the GPL - prevent free software
> >rape. In the example above the company has been able to use the kernel to
>
> What an idiot. How can you "steal" free software? So now your saying that
> anyone that benefits financially from free software is stealing it? Thats the
Dennis is right. We run our shell machine here on Linux, and we sell
shell accounts on it. Does that mean we, too, are "raping" the FSF
and/or Linus Torvalds? Okay, maybe we're just "pillaging"...
> whole stupid point of it. Every one of you is "stealing" from Microsoft and
> IBM by your definition, as you're using an operating system that you "didnt
> spend a dime on" developing. Anyone who sells systems with linux installed
> is in violation, because they're using the "free" software as bait to make money
> on systems hardware.
Well, this argument doesn't make much sense. Whoever runs DOS or Windows
DID spend a lot more than a dime on it. The company spent the money
developing, and then the people paid them back for that development. I
agree with you on the free software issue, but MS/IBM/etc do NOT give
away their software. The end users are, in one form or another, paying
for the development of the software.
> So you're saying that we should stop development of our ethernet bandwidth
> limiter (now available for FreeBSD and BSD/OS) that all of the linux ISPs have
> been asking for? Our current bandwidth limiter only acts on our hardware....
> so it arguably fits your tiny mind's definitions.....but the ethernet
> thing...well, do we have to manufacture a card now?
You really have one of these things? And you're developing for Linux?
Can you tell me where I can get some more info on this?
I do see Dennis's point on not wanting to keep up with kernel-du-jour,
and let me just add to what people have already said - If you don't like
that policy, you don't have to do business with ET. That's your choice,
but don't bitch about it here. I must ask one question of Dennis,
however - Does ET plan to upgrade their driver to the 2.0 series kernel?
It IS, ostensibly, a stable release. I'm not asking for a driver
tomorrow, just a release schedule, if any.
shag
Judd Bourgeois | When we are planning for posterity,
shagboy@thecia.net | we ought to remember that virtue is
Finger for PGP key | not hereditary. Thomas Paine
