On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 08:03:26PM +0100, Ned Slider wrote: > On 23/08/11 13:59, Jim Perrin wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 10:14 PM, Peter J. Pouliot<peter at pouliot.net>wrote: > >>> > >>> What license are these drivers covered under? > >> GPL v2. > >> > >> The drivers are currently in staging on the mainline kernel. My goal, > >> note I am not speaking for the company of I work for (SUSE), or the company > >> who pays for the room I sit in (MSFT), is to help get the work our team has > >> done for the last five years integrated into all linux distributions. > >> > > > > So long as they are GPLv2, and your company/code copyright holder is willing > > to provide something showing there's no danger of lawsuit/DMCA infringement > > for distribution I see no issues with providing them. > > > > > > The driver source is already included in the RHEL6 kernel, in > drivers/staging/hv but because it's still in staging Red Hat chose not > to enable it by default. > > We built the drivers from the RHEL6 code but they seem badly broken: > > http://elrepo.org/bugs/view.php?id=165 Unfortunately I know. I am still trying to organize the current process so that we can provide more community testing and hopefully provide coverage so that this doesn't happen. > > There were a large number of patches submitted for inclusion in > kernel-3.0 (still in staging) but backporting this code to RHEL6 is not > trivial. I know. We have individuals who have already done parts of the backporting that are currently going through testing. > > As it's not enabled by default, I would guess the chances of Red Hat > backporting fixes to RHEL6 are less than zero, regardless of the politics. > > To start with I guess we would need working code that builds on RHEL6 :-) I can definately provide this. p > > _______________________________________________ > CentOS-devel mailing list > CentOS-devel at centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel >