4 ms·
>forces driver to be integrated in the kernel Isn’t that a result of the intentional non-guarantee on not maintaining abi compatibility? Otherwise you end up w
by setr 8y ago
>forces driver to be integrated in the kernel
Isn’t that a result of the intentional non-guarantee on not maintaining abi compatibility? Otherwise you end up with microsoft’s much more difficult to fix situation (maintain abi, difficult to update apis in general, but vendors can trivially produce them without a concern).
Im not sure how microservice architecture or something would sidestep the issue; its more of a political question of who's in charge of maintaining the drivers
- hutzlibu 8y ago"its more of a political question of who's in charge of maintaining the drivers" And even more stupid to set the bar then artificial high, when you don't have enough elitist, ideological pure enough hackers to do that.
- setr 8y agoWhat bar..? It gives freedom to kernel developers to update their apis more freely and maintain effective backwards compatibility, at the cost of extra work managing/updating the drivers themselves instead of relying on vendors to do it. The only bar then is that the driver needs to be in a sane state before being accepted into the kernel tree, so that it remains easy to maintain sanity. Which seems to me a very fair, if not necessary, ask. It’s a pretty clearcut tradeoff, and they apparently have managed the manpower for it thus far... I don’t know why you need “elitist, ideological hackers” to support this strategy