Novell Delivers Device Driver Breakthrough 241
An anonymous reader writes "Novell today announced a new Linux device driver process to make it easier for third party device driver writers to integrate their drivers with SUSE Linux." From the article: "The new driver process allows customers to obtain drivers independently of Novell® kernel updates and supplies a straightforward approach third parties can use when developing device drivers for Novell's SUSE® Linux Enterprise products. The new Linux driver process developed by Novell allows hardware and software vendors to provide Linux drivers and driver updates for their products to customers directly and transparently, in a way that is completely integrated with SUSE Linux Enterprise delivery and support."
Marketing blurb (Score:2, Insightful)
When my copy of Windows fails... (Score:5, Insightful)
I know there will be replies about how the architechure of Linux protects us from some of the risk, but in reality 3rd parties will circumvent any device driver model in an effort to make their device perform optmally, even at the expense of the wider platform.
Straight from the press release (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Marketing blurb (Score:4, Insightful)
Indeed. They keep using the word "process" and I keep thinking "Microkernel!"
In reality, it sounds like a simple driver abstraction layer which will allow commercial entities to plug in binary drivers without any fear of the GPL.
Re:Marketing blurb (Score:5, Insightful)
Well I hope it is! The last thing we need is a whole bunch of obscure binary blobs running in kernel mode!
Re:Breakthrough? (Score:3, Insightful)
I was always under the impression that the specs were closed to ward off copycatting from competitors.
Re:Breakthrough? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:When my copy of Windows fails... (Score:3, Insightful)
When Linux simply doesn't want to work with a device that's missing device support in the kernel. Which is better? You can opt not to install a bad driver, but if you can't have a driver, your don't have the option in the first place.
Re:Breakthrough? (Score:2, Insightful)
No, its not. See how when you want to use an ethernet adapter, you just put it in the machine and it works? See how when you want to use a wireless adapter, its a huge hassle, barely works, and will likely cause you machine to randomly hang?
If people keep accepting binary only shit like this, then the situation will just keep getting worse. Soon, you won't be able to buy any hardware that works, you will only be able to buy hardware + crappy driver for some OS you may or may not use. Demand documentation so the people writing the kernel can write the drivers, and everything will work smoothly and without any hassles, in any OS.
Re:Breakthrough? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Breakthrough? (Score:5, Insightful)
This argument is repeated time and again here on Slashdot and the fact is it is rediculous. Want to know why? Because Novell's customers want it. In fact, they want Suse Linux to run on whatever white-box thrown-together-component list they decide, and having vendors supply drivers to reach that goal makes Novell a more attractive company.
Novell isn't /. - this is the real world. Compatability = greater acceptance = better marketing position & happier customers = more sales. Period.
Re:Breakthrough? (Score:4, Insightful)
Sad thing is, this probably isn't a troll. You sound like most of the kernel developers who refuse to make a stable API or ABI.
You wonder why Linux has such shitty support? Your attitude and the attitude of the devs
Re:Something is breaking, that's for sure (Score:4, Insightful)
Before this, there was almost no hope at all to get a working driver installed in less than 4 hours.
Wrong. There are many options to getting a driver in less than 4 hours. I did it just this morning (dropped the rt2500 driver back to the pre-smp ebuild). Time? Including compile, less than 5 minutes. I even restarted the network interface without dropping any existing ssh connections.
For all the people out there that are about to go on about apt-get or some stupid distro, here [sic] this: give it up.
See, a distro is a kind of linux operating system thingie, and a apt-get is a package management system thingie. Google is your friend, try looking up concepts once in a while.
Your "points":
We need to get a truly working pluggable driver model.
The content of your post clearly presents the fact that you are not part of the "we" here.
We need to have a registry to track applications, and their installation paths, and installation parameters. (This will help with the install, uninstall, and dependency headaches)
Linux needs no registry. Refer to
We need a unified configuration system and configuration user interface.
There are several: xterm + vi, aterm + emacs, konsole + nano, the combinations are nearly endless!
We need a great GUI development IDE
Again, several. The one that rocks the most IMO is KDevelop for GUI stuff. Emacs works for everything else.
We need to not release products with 200 dependencies that change every 4 weeks
Reference? Oh, wait, no, that sounds like hyperbole.
The only thing Linux has over other operating systems right now, is price.
You meant to say:
The only things Linux has over other operating systems right now are price, power, flexibility, and freedom.
As my children (who use Linux) would say: Go away little boy, and take your long nose with you.
Re:Breakthrough? (Score:4, Insightful)
Now that Linux has a large userbase, you're arguing that is ok to relax that since some user wants binary drivers that just work. However, when you go that route, it's hard to go back because everybody *expects* the ABI to remain stable. Instead of improving the kernel, the devs will waste time sorting out ABI issues; not the best use of time.
Where's the "Linux" in this? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Marketing blurb (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Breakthrough? (Score:2, Insightful)
You know, the argument about closed-source drivers and "the idea of open source" is getting old. If I'd want a religiously open system, I'd be running debian. Oh well, I couldn't play the games I paid for, but I'd be running a 100% GPL'ed box, so I should be happy with it, right? Since those games are closed source as well, that would be fine, ok, right? What I want is a system that does what I want, the way I want it to (which in my case happens to mean linux, YMMV), and which lets me do the things I want to do (which in my case means installing the closed-source nvidia drivers).
Sure. Then explain why there are so many OSS projects where you can find bugs in the respective bugtrackers that haven't even been acknowledged after several years, and three-figure number of comments from people who stumbled over the same thing? Hunt the mozilla and kde bugtrackers for any number of examples.
To sum it up, I'm happy with linux as it is, and I'm perfectly fine with the one or other closed-source thing on my box, be it a driver, or any commercial app like moneyplex or the dozen or so games where I've happily bought the linux version.
oh, and a word to the plan9 advocates... I can't see any reason to install that. any at all. Sounds like BeOS to me... good idea, dies (or shrinks to insificance) due to lack of apps and users. Happened to OS/2 as well, which was a shame.
Re:Where's the "Linux" in this? (Score:5, Insightful)
First off, Novell's distribution of Linux is "real Linux." I'm not sure how you think Debian or Ubuntu or whatever is "real Linux" but somehow SuSE, which runs the same kernel, programs, etc., is not. It's foolishness.
Secondarily, if you're trying to crucify Novell for attempting to make it easier for ISV's to integrate with their software offering, I have no idea how you plan to defend that. The problem with Linux acceptance is EXACTLY the problem of standardization. And since there seems to be no standards in motion for how ISV's should write and deploy Linux device drivers, they started their own.
What's the alternative to this? From past experience I think we can agree it's either (a) Hope that someone, somewhere comes up with a standard for "all Linux device driver development and deployment" and then hope that EVERY major Linux vendor and packager adopts this standard implementation and process. This is EXTREMELY unlikely and would take ages AND will still leave out some of the thousands of "distributions" on distrowatch and other places. Boo hoo, it's not fair! (b) Continue as we have been where device drivers are implemented in a myriad of different ways by different ISV's and have little to no support from the vendors themselves and NO support from the distribution creator.
Both of these options suck.
At least the Novell initiative here makes some promises and puts some manpower on these issues. Even the promise of Novell WORKING WITH VENDORS at all is such a welcome change from, for example, the crap shoot that is installing ISV device drivers with a Debian-like Linux system. I'm not saying it doesn't work sometimes or that Debian is a bad distro... but try to get support from ISV's for device drivers they wrote on, say, Ubuntu and let me know how that goes.
Ok, I'd say relax people (Score:5, Insightful)
Binary only drivers are here to stay folks, we aren't going to abolish them, and as long as Linus is in charge of the kernel we aren't going to get a stable ABI, so, kernel update means recompile all your drivers... Any way to ease this burden is a GOOD THING because it encourages people to update their kernels. upgrading a kernel right now on any somewhat complex system, or anything that might not be 100% supported (IE wifi, some network cards, some storage devices and video cards) means a huge headache every single time a new kernel is released (by the major vendors at least 6 times a year). I estimate that if I were to keep my system updated it would take an additional 6-700 man hours per year, that is 30,000-35,000 dollars at $50/hour (which is low), you have to figure 1+ hour per system 75 systems, 6 times a year...
Re:Something is breaking, that's for sure (Score:2, Insightful)
I really hope you mean a driver abstraction layer. In that case, I tend to agree. That is more or less what we have with ndiswrapper, btw.
We need to have a registry to track applications, and their installation paths, and installation parameters. (This will help with the install, uninstall, and dependency headaches)
Give me a break. Have you ever heard of package managers ? A registry, on the model you are implying, is just stupid.
We need a unified configuration system and configuration user interface.
We do. It is called VI. People really should not try driving a car without knowing how to drive. Why should computers be different ?
Half of the problems I have seen happening on Windows servers happen because it is "so easy to configure", so any half-moron think he can do it.
Configuring Windows is not easier than configuring Linux, at least if you want to do it correctly. It is just easier to pretend you know how to.
We need a great GUI development IDE
Like Eclipse ?
We need to not release products with 200 dependencies that change every 4 weeks
What distro are you using ? You should try an enterprise oriented one some day. I suggest CentOS, but YMMV.
The only thing Linux has over other operating systems right now, is price.
The Flexibility open source should provide is hampered too much by the above listed problems.
Or by people who have no idea what they are talking about making statements like those.
Seriously, except for your first point, which is partially true, the others are just nonsense.
Re:ok... (Score:3, Insightful)
Can I use the hardware with Linux on ARM? MIPS? PowerPC? Do they guarantee feature and speed parity with Windows drivers? Will they continue to support the hardware, or, like ATI, will they only bother to support their most recent hardware?
At best it's monogluteal Linux support.