shouldn't this discussion go off-line? or at least into another topic such as 'rants on the openness of software'. I think it has strayed a bit from 'MAKEOPTS values'. On 1/18/07, Bob Young wrote: > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: news [mailto:news@sea.gmane.org]On Behalf Of Duncan > > Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2007 8:51 PM > > To: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org > > Subject: [gentoo-amd64] Re: MAKEOPTS values for Athlon 64 X2 > > > > > > "Hemmann, Volker Armin" posted > > 200701172222.16480.volker.armin.hemmann@tu-clausthal.de, excerpted > below, > > on Wed, 17 Jan 2007 22:22:16 +0100: > > > > > NVIDIA was made aware of a problem with our 1.0-8774 driver > > that caused an X > > > Server crash on July 2006 through a posting on nvnews.net. The > > problem was > > > not identified as a security risk. > > > > This is the core of the problem, right here. > > > > As it happens, I don't personally have the skills to verify the > > quality and security of the code. > > And neither do 99.999% of all computer users, whether they be MAC, Linux, > or Windows users. That's what's at the core of the issue, and it's never > goinig to change. > > In addition, the number of people who even *could* examine a given type of > code (a video driver for example) and render a valid opinion as to it's > quality is *extremely* small. Somone who writes database code for a living > isn't going to have a clue about the details and intricacies of a video > driver module. In fact even somone who writes drivers for another kernel > sub-system (SCSI disk drivers for example) will probably quickly find > themselves beyond their depth of understanding when examining 2D/3D/OpenGL > video driver code. > > > However, that "someone I trust" is the FLOSS > > community, including the authors willing to put their source code out > > there for examination in the first place. > > Code from the OSS comunity has bugs and flaws just like code from the CSS > comunity does, in fact they are often writen by the same people. If > anything, it's likely that the CSS code is a bit more robust and better > tested. CSS code in general (assuming the typical case of it being produced > by a "company"), usually goes through more testing and a more formal Quality > Assurance procedure than OSS. The quality, or lack there of for CSS, often > has a direct effect on the finances of the vendor. That being the case, CSS > vendors are inclined to go to a little extra trouble to keep obvious flaws > out of their releases. On the OSS side of the equation there isn't any hard > financial incentive to rigoriously regression test before posting a new > release, because of the this and the real limitations described above, the > mythical "many eyes" examining OSS code don't actually exist in any > realistic sense. > > > > By contrast, I do NOT trust > > authors not willing to take that step, > > In the case we're talking about it's not actually the authors that aren't > willing to publish their code, I'm sure that the authors are just as proud > of their work as any OSS author is and would be perfectly willing to have it > seen by anyone. It's the Company that feels the need to protect their > intelectual property, and whether you, or RS, or anyone else, does or does > not like it, they in fact have the right to do so. Also, IMO they also have > a valid argument for doing so. > > > > yet still require me to agree they > > have no responsibility if the code doesn't work as intended if I choose > to > > use their programs, so I just choose not to make those agreements, and > > consequently can't use their programs. > > You're certaintly free to make choices based on whatever criteria you feel > like using, I just think that in the grand scheme of things the difference > between using OSS and CSS is prety insignifiant. In the long run good apps, > utilities, and hardware/drivers (whether OSS or CSS) will be successful, and > the bad ones, (whether OSS or CSS), will fade away. > > The vast majority of users don't care whether what they are using is OSS > or CSS, what they do, and should, care about is whether or not it works and > does what they want. So while you're choice to use only OSS may give you > personal satisfaction, in the long run it's not a choice that the vast > majority of users are ever going to, or actually have any real need to > consider. > > -- > Regards, > Bob > > > > -- > gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list > > -- Harry Holt, PMP