policy on GPL'd drivers?

[Daniel O'Connor]

On Tue, 27 May 2003 22:13, David Leimbach wrote:
> > However the idea is that all GPL infected stuff be isolated, allowing a
> > fully working kernel without GPL stuff in there.
>
> Sounds like a "kernel module" is the way to go then.  Perhaps it could
> exist in the ports tree instead of the mainline kernel sources :).  I
> know
> I'd be happy with that... the problem is hosting the driver since I am
> sure
> "patching" it won't be enough to map the linux innards to freebsd's.

There are already a number of kernel modules in the ports tree (eg nvidia 
drivers, ltmdm modem driver, aureal sound driver, etc).

The only downside is that there are no hooks into the build process so you 
have to be VERY careful when you update your kernel, or you get panics :(

(I found this recently, some change broke all of my 3rd party modules and 
caused panics when I tried to load them).

I would really like some way of getting external modules rebuilt at the same 
time as buildkernel and friends, otherwise you have to remember to rebuild 
the affected ports, and it is a pain in the ass.

-- 
Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer
for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au
"The nice thing about standards is that there
are so many of them to choose from."
  -- Andrew Tanenbaum
GPG Fingerprint - 9A8C 569F 685A D928 5140  AE4B 319B 41F4 5D17 FDD5