Re: [GnomeMeeting-list] [PATCH] Add USE_CURRENT_HARDWARE_SIZE hint
- From: Chris Rankin <rankincj yahoo com>
- To: gnomemeeting-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: [GnomeMeeting-list] [PATCH] Add USE_CURRENT_HARDWARE_SIZE hint
- Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 13:41:24 +0100 (BST)
--- Damien Sandras <dsandras seconix com> wrote:
> Le lun 22/09/2003 à 10:33, Chris Rankin a écrit :
> > Recompile BOTH my kernels just so I can use the
> > *optional* pcwx module????? And what about the SMP
> > machine? Do you expect me to remove my second CPU
> > too,and recompile as UP?????? Get real.
>
> I don't understand why you should remove your second
> CPU.
But you still think that I should recompile as UP for
the sake of the pcwx module? This would "logically"
remove the second CPU, if not physically. It's not as
if an SMP version of pcwx has been provided, and
there's no reason to suppose that it is safe to load
the UP version into an SMP kernel. If it works for you
then you are "lucky", nothing more.
The pcwx is an optional, non-GPL, binary-only module
that will taint the kernel. Any one of these is a good
reason not to load it. It is definitely not a good
idea to hold pwc users hostage to it, which is
basically what you're suggesting. Especially when
gnomemeeting is more than capable of running without
it.
However, I do agree that the pwc module should be
modifed to report its capabilities more accurately
when the decompressor is not loaded. But how long do
you reckon it will be before any modified pwc module
will be picked up by all the Linux distributors? I
suspect that modified pwlib packages will be available
a lot sooner.
Chris
________________________________________________________________________
Want to chat instantly with your online friends? Get the FREE Yahoo!
Messenger http://mail.messenger.yahoo.co.uk
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]