> Not when they're explicitly wanting us to write their drivers for them (go
> re-read the article that started all of this).
I don't see that anywhere on http://www.sco.com/UDI/
or http://www.sco.com/press/releases/1998/6824.html.
Is there anywhere else I should be looking. They
write
with UDI available on the Linux system, their developers
can use the latest UNIX devices and peripherals on
the market
which I don't interpret to mean that "we should write
their drivers for them". (Quite the contrary.)
Of course you are right that that would be silly.
Why would anyone want to write a UDI driver for free,
when they could write a Linux driver? Performance and
flexibility would certainly be worse. On the other hand
if you are being paid to write a driver you could do it
for UDI, and this will be good for Linux and other Unixes.
-- Erik Corry erik@arbat.com Ceterum censeo, Microsoftem esse delendam!- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/