# # Discouraging binary kernel modules in Linux
APLawrence.com -  Resources for Unix and Linux Systems, Bloggers and the self-employed

Discouraging binary kernel modules in Linux

I've removed advertising from most of this site and will eventually clean up the few pages where it remains.

While not terribly expensive to maintain, this does cost me something. If I don't get enough donations to cover that expense, I will be shutting the site down in early 2020.

If you found something useful today, please consider a small donation.



Some material is very old and may be incorrect today

© August 2004 Tony Lawrence

Referencing: Vanishing Features of the 2.6 Kernel

This is an older article that I came across while researching something else. This caught my attention:


Most observers foresee a tightening of the limits on binary modules.
This may very well break some rather expensive commercial Linux
products, but that doesn't seem to bother most kernel developers.
 

Well, "break" is perhaps too strong. If somebody really wants to stay binary only, they can. It may cost them much more in compatibility and support because they would be apt to need new versions constantly, but high incentive trumps hard work.

Still, it's interesting that kernel developers seem to want to do some social engineering to at least encourage openness. It just may work, especially as Linux becomes more popular. Probably at least some binary modules are so only because of habit and policy. Make it hard, and policy may get re-examined, and some may realize that there is really nothing in their code that needs hiding anyway.

Last years flap about Linksys ended with Linksys releasing source, but not for the wireless interface itself, so they apparently still felt they had something they needed to keep secret. The whole area of binary modules has been a source of confusion for some time.

I confess that I really don't understand why hardware manufacturers have this reluctance to expose their interfaces. You would think that making it easy for others to write drivers would just lead to greater use of the hardware, but few seem to think that way.

If you found something useful today, please consider a small donation.



Got something to add? Send me email.





(OLDER)    <- More Stuff -> (NEWER)    (NEWEST)   

Printer Friendly Version

->
-> Discouraging binary kernel modules in Linux


Inexpensive and informative Apple related e-books:

Take Control of Numbers

Take Control of Pages

Take Control of OS X Server

Take control of Apple TV, Second Edition

El Capitan: A Take Control Crash Course





More Articles by © Tony Lawrence





Printer Friendly Version

Have you tried Searching this site?

This is a Unix/Linux resource website. It contains technical articles about Unix, Linux and general computing related subjects, opinion, news, help files, how-to's, tutorials and more.

Contact us


Printer Friendly Version





The last bug isn't fixed until the last user is dead. (Sidney Markowitz)




Linux posts

Troubleshooting posts


This post tagged:

Blog

Linux

Opinion

Unix



Unix/Linux Consultants

Skills Tests

Unix/Linux Book Reviews

My Unix/Linux Troubleshooting Book

This site runs on Linode