[ViX_Misc] New Vu+ Drivers for new linux kernels (15.07.2014)

[Sicilian]

Not to mention VU+'s screw up with the Solo SE drivers, last update broke recording and timeshift.

 

[Larry-G]

Not to mention VU+'s screw up with the Solo SE drivers, last update broke recording and timeshift.

LOL yeah......

 

[DaMacFunkin]

Without intending insult you do realize that BH and VTI are both basically running a stock VU+ OI with their own plugins etc added on, and as such they don't need any extra development to incorporate these new kernels ?.

For the rest of us it's not going to be so easy as there are some serious issues with these kernels which need working through before a release is even considered.

I was just saying that a new Black Hole had been released with the new kernel, i knew you would all take it personally...
But TBH honest i didn't know that Black Hole was that closely related to the original image, i always believed it was a completely in-house closed project.
Keep up the good work and don't take things too personally :thumbsup:

 

[Larry-G]

I was just saying that a new Black Hole had been released with the new kernel, i knew you would all take it personally...

There is nothing for me to take personally, I was just stating that it is not a easy task to implement this new kernel into the image.

TBH honest i didn't know that Black Hole was that closely related to the original image, i always believed it was a completely in-house closed project.
Keep up the good work and don't take things too personally :thumbsup:

Yes it's fairly widely known that both VTI and BH are pretty much stock Vu+ images with a few plugins and customization's thrown in, added to the fact that BH are technically operating illegally by keeping their image closed source, but that is a discussion for another time and place.

 

[Rob van der Does]

.... added to the fact that BH are technically operating illegally by keeping their image closed source.....

That applies to both BH & VTi.

 

[rossi2000]

just asking...
why is it illegal to close source something?

granted it doesnt do much for the sat scene, but i didnt think it was illegal.

 

[Larry-G]

just asking...
why is it illegal to close source something?

granted it doesnt do much for the sat scene, but i didnt think it was illegal.

I am not a coder so I can not go into specifics but the way I understand it, it's because they are using the Vu+ OI as their base and that is it self a opensource image, so they have taken a already opensource image and decided to close it up for their own reasons. I'm sure rob or some one else would be able to explain it in better terms than I have.

 

[rossi2000]

ah right, i think i get what ya mean.
but that would be just the OE from VU thats opensource?

isnt bh/vti using there own E2? or is that vus aswell?

 

[Larry-G]

ah right, i think i get what ya mean.
but that would be just the OE from VU thats opensource?

isnt bh/vti using there own E2? or is that vus aswell?

Not sure to be honest, You would probably need both a legal degree and have a good head for code to get all the way down to the very bottom of it.

 

[Rob van der Does]

VTi & BH are using VU's image. So that 's OE and E2. Just read the GPL: it clearly states that all use of (their) Open Source software should include a copy of the software, either published on a public site or made available (send) on request.

And VU[SUP]+[/SUP] is bound to act this way, as they are using a clone (be it an old one) of DM's software, published under GPL as well.

 

[Rob van der Does]

I asked VTi about it once: they said that including the x.py-files would cover for that.
Well, it doesn't, as only a part of E2 is compiled in python. OE (Linux) isn't and E2 only partially.

 

[Trial]

Hi Rob,
perhaps they are only adding/changing Python and not C(++). A binary compare of E2 between BH/VTi and VU would be interesting.

ciao

 

[Rob van der Does]

Even if that would be correct they don't comply with the GPL-license. An image is not a (copy of the) source.

 

[thisntaht]

Hi Rob,

Quick question, Any progress on adding the latest vu kernels and drivers to upcoming vix image? Are ye working on it?
Just wondering :thumbsup:

Please near in mind that all VTi has to do is to add some plugins to the image VU[SUP]+[/SUP] has provided.
While we have to invent all kinds of stuff to be able to update to their new kernel. This is a major effort.

 

[DaMacFunkin]

Apparently Andy is taking a very long rest and the image won't be updated with the new kernel in the foreseeable future.

 

[Sicilian]

Apparently Andy is taking a very long rest and the image won't be updated with the new kernel in the foreseeable future.

May I ask where this info came from? Because this is not entirely true. OE-A has updated from 2.2 to 2.3, we currently have issue building from 2.3.

 

[thisntaht]

Ok, How do you know that, just curious?
Thats doesn't sound good for VIX if thats the case

Apparently Andy is taking a very long rest and the image won't be updated with the new kernel in the foreseeable future.

 

[dax]

The latest kernel/drivers for vu+ are included in apollo 029 or not yet? Because in the changelog i read only

[vuplus] * Update driver 20140829(solo2, solose)  - Fix transcoding problem(solo2, solose)  - Optimize memory usage(solo2)

Thath means new kernel/drivers?
Thanks in advance

 

[DaMacFunkin]

They where implemented in 25...