Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2006 09:16:00 +0530 From: "Joseph Koshy" <joseph.koshy@gmail.com> To: "Jim Stapleton" <stapleton.41@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: letter writing for FreeBSD support Message-ID: <84dead720610272046p79729f0ex350f4e0f5f6faf8@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <80f4f2b20610271425h3cc51427nb7ba61bb6db54143@mail.gmail.com> References: <80f4f2b20610261618l63660139m38ccb0ec682b947f@mail.gmail.com> <35ffa5710610271212y4bd51341m3684b11a05192a10@mail.gmail.com> <80f4f2b20610271425h3cc51427nb7ba61bb6db54143@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
bd> Please remove the bits about binary blobs.. Those are a bd> Bad Thing(tm). js> If you had the choice between binary blobs with well js> documented use, or fully binary drivers, which would you js> choose? I'm talking about a case, such as most notably - For the user, binary kernel blobs are a huge security risk. - As a project we don't have a stable in-kernel API, so it is difficult for us to provide a stable kernel environment for binary blobs to run in. -- FreeBSD Volunteer, http://people.freebsd.org/~jkoshy
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?84dead720610272046p79729f0ex350f4e0f5f6faf8>