[SLE] Novell's official position on binary only kernel modules
Hi, I recently read a Ottawa Linux Symposium talk report by Greg Kroah-Hartman (SuSE Labs/Novell) which is at: http://www.kroah.com/log/linux/ols_2006_keynote.html The precise wording of Novell's policy is: ========================================= Novell's Official Position Most developers of the kernel community consider non-GPL kernel modules ot be infringing on their copyright. Novell does respect this position, and will no longer distribute non-GPL kernel modules as part of future products. February 9, 2006 ========================================= Does this mean we won't see ATI/NVidia's graphics drivers in their future releases? How much of the current hardware will be impacted by such a policy? thanks, Osho -- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
On Thursday 27 July 2006 19:10, Osho GG wrote:
Does this mean we won't see ATI/NVidia's graphics drivers in their future releases? How much of the current hardware will be impacted by such a policy?
You never have seen the ATI/nVidia binary drivers as part of the release. A script was provided for nVidia that downloaded the driver from the nVidia website, and did the commands to get it installed. So there is no "impact" as such. (That is if you ignore the fact that this script is not in 10.1, thus making it harder for Joe Public to use accelerated Gfx on their system.) -- Steve Boddy -- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
On Thursday 27 July 2006 12:36, Stephen Boddy wrote:
On Thursday 27 July 2006 19:10, Osho GG wrote:
Does this mean we won't see ATI/NVidia's graphics drivers in their future releases? How much of the current hardware will be impacted by such a policy?
You never have seen the ATI/nVidia binary drivers as part of the release. A script was provided for nVidia that downloaded the driver from the nVidia website, and did the commands to get it installed. So there is no "impact" as such. (That is if you ignore the fact that this script is not in 10.1, thus making it harder for Joe Public to use accelerated Gfx on their system.) --
Actually in 10.1 there is a script to do this tiny-nvidia-installer --update will download the driver and compile the kernel module. -- Don -- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
On Thursday 27 July 2006 20:36, Don Raboud wrote:
On Thursday 27 July 2006 12:36, Stephen Boddy wrote:
On Thursday 27 July 2006 19:10, Osho GG wrote:
Does this mean we won't see ATI/NVidia's graphics drivers in their future releases? How much of the current hardware will be impacted by such a policy?
You never have seen the ATI/nVidia binary drivers as part of the release. A script was provided for nVidia that downloaded the driver from the nVidia website, and did the commands to get it installed. So there is no "impact" as such. (That is if you ignore the fact that this script is not in 10.1, thus making it harder for Joe Public to use accelerated Gfx on their system.) --
Actually in 10.1 there is a script to do this
tiny-nvidia-installer --update
will download the driver and compile the kernel module.
Well I'll be... You learn something new everyday. Thank you very much for pointing that out to me. Way more convenient than my current procedure. And just because I'm a pedant, it's actually a program, not a script, because I tried to view it first and it's an ELF binary ;-) -- Steve Boddy -- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
Stephen Boddy wrote:
And just because I'm a pedant, it's actually a program, not a script, because I tried to view it first and it's an ELF binary ;-)
Careful. That's SCO's IP. ;-) -- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
On Saturday 29 July 2006 23:14, James Knott wrote:
Stephen Boddy wrote:
And just because I'm a pedant, it's actually a program, not a script, because I tried to view it first and it's an ELF binary ;-)
Careful. That's SCO's IP. ;-)
OMG, I remember the first three bytes!!! (hint: ELF ;-) I'm compromised!! I can never work in computers again! Guess I'll have to stack shelves for a living :-( -- Steve Boddy -- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
Stephen Boddy wrote:
On Saturday 29 July 2006 23:14, James Knott wrote:
Stephen Boddy wrote:
And just because I'm a pedant, it's actually a program, not a script, because I tried to view it first and it's an ELF binary ;-) Careful. That's SCO's IP. ;-)
OMG, I remember the first three bytes!!! (hint: ELF ;-) I'm compromised!! I can never work in computers again! Guess I'll have to stack shelves for a living :-(
This shows how much SCO is stretching reality. <http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20060723130041393> They're now saying they don't even own the IP they're suing about, but IBM was still supposedly prohibited from disclosing it??!!?? -- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
into electronic streams flowing thru the cosmos On Saturday 29 July 2006 9:46 pm, James Knott wrote:
They're now saying they don't even own the IP they're suing about, but IBM was still supposedly prohibited from disclosing it??!!??
Well that is about as Microsoft-esque as anyone ever needs to be.. Darl must think he can adopt Bills attitude and suddenly everything will go his way. He must have stood to close to the "Master" and his brain is going to explode while a "chest burster" version of Ballmer w/ his patented scream "We WILL prevail over all, because we said so. So there !!" -- j To know a man, hear what he does not say, watch what he does not do... -- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
They're now saying they don't even own the IP they're suing about, but IBM was still supposedly prohibited from disclosing it??!!??
Well that is about as Microsoft-esque as anyone ever needs to be.. Darl
Microsoft does not sue over such ridiculous things (at least now as loud as SCO).
must think he can adopt Bills attitude and suddenly everything will go his way. He must have stood to close to the "Master" and his brain is going to explode while a "chest burster" version of Ballmer w/ his patented scream "We WILL prevail over all, because we said so. So there !!"
Jan Engelhardt -- -- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
On Sunday 30 July 2006 05:54, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
Well that is about as Microsoft-esque as anyone ever needs to be.. Darl
Microsoft does not sue over such ridiculous things (at least now as loud as SCO).
No, Micro$oft *pays* someone else to do it, like they paid SCO. -- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
Stephen Boddy wrote:
On Thursday 27 July 2006 19:10, Osho GG wrote:
Does this mean we won't see ATI/NVidia's graphics drivers in their future releases? How much of the current hardware will be impacted by such a policy?
You never have seen the ATI/nVidia binary drivers as part of the release. A script was provided for nVidia that downloaded the driver from the nVidia website, and did the commands to get it installed. So there is no "impact" as such. (That is if you ignore the fact that this script is not in 10.1, thus making it harder for Joe Public to use accelerated Gfx on their system.)
Hopefully Novell will work on this as they are a distribution designed for end-users. I like this guy's take on the matter (including Novell's position) which was presented at a recent conference. http://www.kroah.com/log/linux/ols_2006_keynote.html Of course, there's always Arjan Van De Ven's doomsday scenereo... http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0512.0/0972.html In the meantime, I'll just keep using SUSE on my systems and be glad I'm not using XP. I'm so happy when my son comes out of my office and tells me he got level three on Tux Math. :) -- K -- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
"Osho GG" <oshogg@gmail.com> writes:
Hi,
I recently read a Ottawa Linux Symposium talk report by Greg Kroah-Hartman (SuSE Labs/Novell) which is at:
http://www.kroah.com/log/linux/ols_2006_keynote.html
The precise wording of Novell's policy is:
========================================= Novell's Official Position
Most developers of the kernel community consider non-GPL kernel modules ot be infringing on their copyright. Novell does respect this position, and will no longer distribute non-GPL kernel modules as part of future products.
February 9, 2006 =========================================
Does this mean we won't see ATI/NVidia's graphics drivers in their future releases? How much of the current hardware will be impacted by such a policy?
We never had NVidia's drivers as part of our releases and will not add them. Btw. NVidia and ATI both of repositories with drivers that you can use: Add as ZYPP / YUM source: http://www2.ati.com/suse/ as repo for ATI drivers and Packages: x11-video-fglrx ati-fglrx-kmp-default (replace default by your kernel flavour) ftp://download.nvidia.com/novell for NVIDIA drivers. Package: nvidia-gfx-kmp-default (replace default by your flavour) While these are the SLED 10 drivers, the current SUSE Linux 10.1 update kernel works fine with them, as it's basically the same, Andreas -- Andreas Jaeger, aj@suse.de, http://www.suse.de/~aj/ SUSE Linux Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126
Is there a place I can download the ATI drivers directly? Andreas Jaeger wrote:
"Osho GG" <oshogg@gmail.com> writes:
Hi,
I recently read a Ottawa Linux Symposium talk report by Greg Kroah-Hartman (SuSE Labs/Novell) which is at:
http://www.kroah.com/log/linux/ols_2006_keynote.html
The precise wording of Novell's policy is:
========================================= Novell's Official Position
Most developers of the kernel community consider non-GPL kernel modules ot be infringing on their copyright. Novell does respect this position, and will no longer distribute non-GPL kernel modules as part of future products.
February 9, 2006 =========================================
Does this mean we won't see ATI/NVidia's graphics drivers in their future releases? How much of the current hardware will be impacted by such a policy?
We never had NVidia's drivers as part of our releases and will not add them.
Btw. NVidia and ATI both of repositories with drivers that you can use:
Add as ZYPP / YUM source:
http://www2.ati.com/suse/ as repo for ATI drivers and Packages: x11-video-fglrx ati-fglrx-kmp-default (replace default by your kernel flavour)
ftp://download.nvidia.com/novell for NVIDIA drivers. Package: nvidia-gfx-kmp-default (replace default by your flavour)
While these are the SLED 10 drivers, the current SUSE Linux 10.1 update kernel works fine with them, as it's basically the same,
Andreas
-- One day at a time, one second if that's what it takes -- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 01:08:43PM -0700, Bruce Ferrell wrote:
Is there a place I can download the ATI drivers directly?
Its there, you just need to guess the URL. (download repodata/primary.xml.gz, see sle10/i586/.....) We recommend adding it as YUM repo, so you will also get updates from there automatically. Ciao, Marcus -- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
Bruce Ferrell wrote:
Is there a place I can download the ATI drivers directly? I downloaded the installer. Works for me. I was originally getting c400 FPS. I now get c4000
Peter -- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
Peter Bradley wrote:
Bruce Ferrell wrote:
Is there a place I can download the ATI drivers directly? I downloaded the installer. Works for me. I was originally getting c400 FPS. I now get c4000
Peter Ooops! the URL would help:
https://support.ati.com/ics/support/default.asp?deptID=894&task=knowledge&folderID=27 Peter -- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
On Thursday 27 July 2006 16:02, Andreas Jaeger wrote: [...]
We never had NVidia's drivers as part of our releases and will not add them.
Btw. NVidia and ATI both of repositories with drivers that you can use:
Add as ZYPP / YUM source:
http://www2.ati.com/suse/ as repo for ATI drivers and Packages: x11-video-fglrx ati-fglrx-kmp-default (replace default by your kernel flavour)
[...]
While these are the SLED 10 drivers, the current SUSE Linux 10.1 update kernel works fine with them, as it's basically the same,
Andreas
Ok, now I'm curious. Do you install both the rpm files for the ATI cards or just one of them? Afterwards you need to run sax2 to set for fglrx module rather than using the present radeon, right? thanks, Lee -- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 05:44:50PM -0400, BandiPat wrote:
On Thursday 27 July 2006 16:02, Andreas Jaeger wrote: [...]
We never had NVidia's drivers as part of our releases and will not add them.
Btw. NVidia and ATI both of repositories with drivers that you can use:
Add as ZYPP / YUM source:
http://www2.ati.com/suse/ as repo for ATI drivers and Packages: x11-video-fglrx ati-fglrx-kmp-default (replace default by your kernel flavour)
[...]
While these are the SLED 10 drivers, the current SUSE Linux 10.1 update kernel works fine with them, as it's basically the same,
Andreas
Ok, now I'm curious. Do you install both the rpm files for the ATI cards or just one of them? Afterwards you need to run sax2 to set for fglrx module rather than using the present radeon, right?
Do not walk, but RUN! to this URL: http://www.suse.de/~sndirsch/ati-installer-HOWTO.html It explains all in detail. Ciao, Marcus -- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
Ok, now I'm curious. Do you install both the rpm files for the ATI cards or just one of them? Afterwards you need to run sax2 to set for fglrx module rather than using the present radeon, right?
Do not walk, but RUN! to this URL:
http://www.suse.de/~sndirsch/ati-installer-HOWTO.html
It explains all in detail.
Ciao, Marcus ========== Thanks Marcus, That helps and I did play a bit last evening with this thing. I'm not sure the present drivers are setup for the 2.6..16.21-0.13 kernel
On Friday 28 July 2006 02:00, Marcus Meissner wrote: [...] though as the install added a directory for 2.6.16.21-0.8 kernel and dropped the fglrx.ko module into an updates directory there. I was still able to get sax2 to run with: sax2 -r -m 0=fglrx All seemed to work well, everything setup just as before, a new xorg.conf file was created with all the ATI stuff there. But when I restarted X, I didn't have any direct rendering, thus no 3d running. I tried a few things, like adding the fglrx.ko module to the newer kernel "updates" folder, but nothing helped. I ran aticonfig also without success. The only thing I didn't do was drop the module into the drm folder of the new kernel, so don't know if that would be the answer or not. Anyone here have thoughts or solutions for the problem? thanks, Lee -- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
participants (13)
-
Andreas Jaeger -
BandiPat -
Bruce Ferrell -
Bruce Marshall -
Don Raboud -
James Knott -
Jan Engelhardt -
jfweber＠gilweber.com -
Marcus Meissner -
Osho GG -
PerfectReign -
Peter Bradley -
Stephen Boddy