Slashdot Mirror
Simplifying Linux Driver Installation
prostoalex writes "O'Reilly Network posts an update on Project Utopia that produced Hardware Abstraction Layer for Linux simplifying device changes. They also link to the Driver on Demand project on SourceForge, whose goal is to create a central database to enable Linux desktops download the drivers automatically when the user plugs in her new hardware device."
What do want to do then? Write assembly in your application to get to a device? Read out loud Hardware - Abstraction - Layer.
If getting drivers becomes that easy, I'll be considering atleast dual-booting. Drivers have always been something that have kept me away from Linux, but if they're as easy to find as plugging in a device, I'll switch in no time. Now, if only those manufacturers would put out some decent quality drivers, I wouldn't have much reason to stay on Windows.
What, like a kernel?
As cute as that little pun is, PnP on WinNT 5.x Just Works(TM) the vast majority of the time and life is good. It's one area were Windows has a clear advantage over Linux and it's great to see the gap is finally starting to be closed.
Though I fear Linus' hardliner stance on ABI compatibility will hinder all this. Idealogical issues aside, from a user's standpoint a stable ABI for drivers is a significant plus for a desktop OS. I can only hope at some point the Linux kernel becomes stable enough for it to be considered.
That's only part of the issue. Lots of people don't want a KDE and Gnome merger because of philosophical differences on what a desktop should be like. I do, however, wish that on many forked or duplicated projects people would take just a second to think about who, besides themselves, a fork (or duplication) would actually benefit. When the forked or new version provides no significant new features, it's probably doing more harm than good.
GreyPoopon
--
Why is it I can write insightful comments but can't come up with a clever signature?
As for security, the only truely SECURE system is one that is unplugged and sitting in a locked closet. Otherwise, get a firewall, get a virus scanner, and don't open weird email attachments.
That's no joke. Why haven't I switched permanently to Linux? The list of reasons is quickly becoming shorter and shorter.
Games? - The biggest games (and more games in general) are getting Linux ports.
Office suites/productivity? Done.
Plug 'n' play hardware and peripherals? Getting better, but the actual hardware manufacturers sure seem to be dragging their heels.
Low cost? Can't beat free.
Easy to configure? Again, getting better, but still a long way to go.
Easy to learn? Well, I haven't done any studies on this, but from various "switch" stories, it's at least as easy to learn (if not easier) than windows.
Security? Pretty dang good, but I'm not going to fool myself. If Linux were as widespread on the desktop as MS Windows, there would be a whole lot more exploits. Not necessarily more than on Windows, but more than there are now.
Help find a cure for cancer. Join the [H]orde
You missed the real reason for this tactic: to `encourage' hardware manufacturers to play nice and release the source code to their drivers by making open source drivers the path of least resistance.
What is wrong with "ripping off" the GOOD Microsoft ideas? People bash Microsoft for their BAD ideas and bad IMPLEMENTATIONS, not to mention the distinct lack of Openess which is what makes OSS so attractive by comparison.
The unofficial
Something like this isn't the only thing holding linux back, but it would be a big help. I find it pretty frustrating that everytime you want to update the kernel, you have to recompile and setup all those non-builtin drivers to get things working again. At the very least, it would be nice if the kernel had at least some minimal guarantees that drivers compiled for one major revision of the kernel (i.e. the 2.4 series or 2.6 series) worked on all minor versions. At the moment, any time there's some little security bug requiring a kernel upgrade, you need to recompile your drivers or else force them to run for a version they weren't compiled for and risk something breaking.
So, someone creates a stable as in abi/api HAL for linux. Then all sorts of manufaturers start releasing binary only drivers. Hypotheticly these are of good quality and we don't wind up with the windows BSOD type problems, this is very unlikely. We still get lots of binary only drivers with wierd licensing that limits distribution and what you can do with the hardware. Because drivers for stuff are avalible noone have interest in maintaining open drivers. Linux becomes as encombered as windows when you want to do anthing with it besides desktop PC. Forget having a cheep OS with lots of hardware support to build and sell your custom solutions with. Now since the hardware support will still probably be better and more complete on that M$ os all those little embeded things are gonna end up with winCE/pocketPc200X/XPembeded or whatever. This will kill the one market where Linux is begging to become the player to beat rather then the other option. If this takes off linux is gonna end up where it was five years ago on the desks of us geeks, rather then were it is now on half of the little and BIG network appliences out there even if it is unknow to the user. Once that happens we will lose lots of the corporte support and contributes to the kernel as well. Linus made the right call to not stabilize the ABI and force vendors to either make open drivers or at least have to put up with a wrapper.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
You missed the real reason for this tactic: to `encourage' hardware manufacturers to play nice and release the source code to their drivers by making open source drivers the path of least resistance.
/., ad nauseam et infinitum.
And we all see how well that's worked for many inkjet printers, essentially any graphics card, those Philips webcams that were recently mentioned on
and see how stable it is. Much as I hate Microsoft (and I do), Windows XP is a stable operating system when it's running good quality, name brand software/hardware. At least the desktop is, no comment on server stuff. Where you run into problems is all the crappy 3rd party drivers and add ins that run in the background and make tons of changes to they system. If you start adding that stuff to Linux you'll have the same problems. On the other hand, Linux's openness makes adding this crap harder, and often unecessary...
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
So? You're asking people who are doing things *in their spare time* to give you a deadline for fixing something that may be needed by exactly one person (you).
If you want help feel free ask what the current state of the driver is, but don't expect anyone to do anything about it unless you're prepared to help, or give them money.
btw. MS are exactly the same. Try asking them when 'feature x' will work. They'll want money before you'll get a sensible answer about it (in that case you don't even have the option of doing it yourself).
"Hardware Abstraction Layer cos we all know how well that worked in Windows NT "
Yeah, all my hardware works.
"Derp de derp."
Who will maintain this fork? It will get crustier and crustier and crustier due to the absolute need to NEVER break a binary only driver. Once it gets crusty enough, it won't be possible to backport the changes from Linus' kernel which WILL continue to be developed? Furthermore, this fork will be x86 only. The only real reason this fork will have to exist will be for consumer x86 desktops. This will put off even more devs.
I seriously doubt that you'll find a group of kernel devs who will willingly inflict that situation on themselves. Remember that leak of Windows 2000 source? At least 15% percent of it turned out be kluges meant to prevent particular applications from breaking. We DON'T need to go there.
While this is a bit off topic, its relevant.
Don't misunderstand me, as I have the up most respect for the guy, but after reading some of his comments about vendors approaching him about drivers, and his refusal to even discuss a HAL layer ( which IS the right way to, even if he doesnt want to deal with it ), I can see that the arrogance of the Linux community is starting to rub off. ( actually, if the article is correct, it may have actually reduced my respect for him as he's acting more like a child.. ).
Yes its his kernel and he can do with what he pleases, I understand this. But I also understand he would like it to continue to succeed, and being an ass wont advance that cause a bit. Look where it gets Theo..
I do expect to be modded down for this of course, but I see the 'attitude' as the #2 problem with Linux in general. ( #1 being the convoluted un-structured nature in general, which effects things in a detrimental way a lot more then many want to admit. ).
Until people get off their high horse and start acting professional instead of condescending, things here will have just about topped out, and the market share will be stagnant.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
then exercise your freedom of choice, and stop using Linux.
The Internet's nature is peer to peer - 20050301_cs_profs.pdf