Slashdot Log In
Wii Will Have an Updatable Linux OS
Posted by
Zonk
on Sun Oct 08, 2006 05:40 PM
from the penguin-with-a-wand dept.
from the penguin-with-a-wand dept.
eldavojohn writes "There's bits and pieces of information floating around that revolve around Iwata Asks interviews on Nintendo's website. What I found interesting was the tidbit about the updatable operating system: 'Wii is the first system from Nintendo that we can continue to be involved in (via operating system updates) after the customer buys it. This means that Wii will greatly expand and diversify the ways in which people will enjoy games in the future.' The Wii is reported to operate on top of a proprietary form of the Linux kernel, although there are already efforts to make a GNU/Linux for the console. So, the answer to the age old question is that it already runs Linux."
Related Stories
[+]
Linux and the Coming Consoles 73 comments
eldavojohn writes "Despite reports from the CEO that the PS3 will ship with Linux, LinuxDevices is now saying that it won't. Also, despite a rumor that the Wii will have Linux, the originator of the rumor has revealed himself to be a prankster. This won't stop you from putting Yellow Dog on the PS3 or running WiiLi, a live Linux CD for the Wii."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Wii Will Have an Updatable Linux OS
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 330 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
"a proprietary form of the Linux kernel" (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://joe-baldwin.net/ | Last Journal: Saturday September 02 2006, @11:58AM)
Re:"a proprietary form of the Linux kernel" (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://www.foobarsoft.com/)
Re:"a proprietary form of the Linux kernel" (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://keleus.freeshell.org/ | Last Journal: Sunday October 28, @02:17PM)
Re:"a proprietary form of the Linux kernel" (Score:5, Insightful)
How about: "If you use ANY operating system, you won't be able to use the latest and greatest hardware available unless you're willing to accept some bitter terms from the manufacturer to protect their intellectual property". Using Linux doesn't subject you to terms that are more bitter, it's just that we Linux users have grown to expect freedom.
Sony PS2 linux (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:"a proprietary form of the Linux kernel" (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, I Phrased That Badly (Score:4, Informative)
(http://slashdot.org/~eldavojohn/ | Last Journal: Tuesday October 16, @03:26PM)
I'm not a lawyer so I'm not too clear on the GPL. I thought you could modify the software under it and release it without ever being forced to hand out the source code. I could be wrong though.
Re:Yeah, I Phrased That Badly (Score:5, Funny)
(http://www.martianfrontier.com/ | Last Journal: Wednesday January 15 2003, @01:04AM)
Re:Yeah, I Phrased That Badly (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Yeah, I Phrased That Badly (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Yeah, I Phrased That Badly (Score:5, Informative)
(http://slashdot.org/)
As a general rule, yes. There are things which definately require you to release it, using GPL'd code or a GPL'd library. There are various shade of gray with different encapsulations of the code, I won't go into that. But there's also a few very clear cases where you do not have to distribute source:
a) By mere aggregation, i.e. the software has to actually work together, not just come on the same media
b) Using standard OS API calls (otherwise there could be no GPL'd softwara for Windows, or proprietary applications on linux)
c) Using libraries that come standard with the OS/compiler (e.g. Microsofts standard C/C++ library)
So in the example he quoted, yes Nintendo could use the Linux kernel, but not release any of the userspace code if they built that from scratch, or only the modified libraries if using GTK (which is LGPL). They do need to distribute any chances they make to the kernel, but since binary drivers are tolerated it need not be more than a stub. Also, there's nothing preventing them (and I imagine they will be) using a digitally signed kernel, so that modified kernels can't be used to copy game disks.
Re:Yeah, I Phrased That Badly (Score:5, Interesting)
You are wrong; you're thinking of the BSD-style licenses. Anything under the GPL (or software that extensively uses GPL-software's interfaces) must have source released if it's released.
Actually, you are wrong. The GPL is only required (i.e., only applicable) when copyright is involved; i.e., making a derivative work. For there to be a derivative work, there has to be a copying within the ambit of the copyright act. If you look to the Altai test (adopted by pretty much every court), you'll see that code dictated by external requirements (i.e., pretty much every piece of software running on a UNIX/Linux system has to use malloc, etc., and thus must either call the system calls directly or via the C Library) is specifically filtered out of the copyright comparison. So any interface calls, even symbols brought in from include files, are [strongly] arguably not even copyrightable (a 'method of operation'; see, e.g., 17 U.S.C. 102, and Lotus v. Borland, 49 F.3d 807 (1st Cir. 1995)) and even if they are, would be stripped out of any comparison of code done in an infringement action. Absent an infringement, there's no need for GPL applicability...
Further, the COPYING file for the Linux kernel (http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/COPYING [kernel.org]) specifically carves out "user programs that use kernel services by normal system call." So, with appropriate facts, one could easily argue copyright estoppel in the (unlikely) event that Linus (as the copyright holder for much, if not most, of the kernel, AFAIK -- the FSF, etc. would not have standing to sue, it would have to be Linus or some other kernel contributor whose work was in the Wii) brought suit.
Re:"a proprietary form of the Linux kernel" (Score:5, Funny)
(http://reverend.healeys.net/)
Re:"a proprietary form of the Linux kernel" (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.pobox.com/~meta/ | Last Journal: Sunday February 29 2004, @09:19AM)
That is, they'll provide the source code with their proprietary modifications for the Wii hardware, but it'll be totally useless as the Wii hardware will be designed so that it will only run code signed by Nintendo. So the modified code will be useless to Wii owners, and also useless to everyone else as PC hardware won't have any use for the Wii hardware support.
And Linus will no doubt say that this is just peachy.
I think it's exactly the kind of crap the GPL was supposed to stop. If I purchase hardware and software that's GPL licensed, I should be able to modify the software and run the modified version on the only hardware it's useful for, the hardware I own. That's why I support RMS's efforts with GPL v3 [ath0.com] and think they're a good thing. In fact, I think they should go further.
"proprietary form of the Linux kernel"? (Score:1, Redundant)
Re:"proprietary form of the Linux kernel"? (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://teo.se/)
This is a loophole that GNU GPL version 3 is meant to prevent.
This is New? (Score:3, Interesting)
(http://www.quasiblog.net/)
It already runs Linux. (Score:1)
(http://www.inetwork-plus.com/)
Transporter_ii
Linux on Wii, since when? (Score:2, Insightful)
Who is reporting that? Its the first time I hear that and the linked webpages don't really give any more detail, the Iwata interview simply states that the Wii will have upgradable firmware, nothing Linux related.
Re:Linux on Wii, since when? (Score:5, Informative)
The person who posted the original story really should have done the 5 minutes research I just did, there is zero credible evidence that Nintendo has done anything at all with Linux. The "source" of the original speculation is someone named "Kiyoshi Saruwatari", who claims to be a designer who doesn't work for Nintendo, but has worked with them. He never names a company, specific business interactions, the nature of his work, nothing. His "facts" seem to consist of pure conjecture and swizzling of common publically released information (Virtual Console, etc).
In the months before the Wii controller was revealed at Tokyo Game Show 2005, there was a rash of "insider" blogs, with a lot of suspiciously made-up sounding Japanese names, with calculatedly poor English skills. These blogs were the source of a lot of the early misinformation, the "VR helmet" nonsense, the "secretly more graphically powerful than both Xbox 360 and PS3", the "Kid Icarus sequel", etc. My guess is half of them were American or European fanboys who were trying to stir things up.
In short I don't consider it responsible to call the single, highly dubious rumor that Nintendo is using Linux "reporting", and I hope this doesn't touch off a lot of controversy over what began with nothing more than a big fat lie / hoax.
Imagine (Score:1)
(http://www.uiowa.edu/~nathist/Site/giganto.html)
Tsk. Pure BS. (Score:5, Interesting)
/greger
where does it mention Linux? (Score:5, Interesting)
Where exactly in the Iwata Asks article does it say it runs on a proprietery version of the Linux kernel?
Infact where does it mention the Wii runs Linux on it at all?
I think I found the story, thanks google. And it says that its a rumor from one of the designers who said:
Since when did "GUI applications" count as in the kernel?
Story found on:
http://wii.qj.net/Wii-Will-Use-Linux-as-Operating
Another quote direct from the so called "insider" I bet Nintendo are thanking their lucky stars that GPLv3 isn't out and that Linus Torvalds prefers v2 anyway, isn't there going to be something in it about locking out modified versions?
I am skeptical about this guy, but make up your own mind,
Orriginal blog post about Nintendo Wii having Linux on it: http://saruwatari-wii.blogspot.com/2006/07/softwa
If anyon can find a quote about a proprietery kernel please post a reply,
Proprietary Linux is pure nonsense (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://forked.de/)
You would imagine that people would know this by heart by now...
Vaportalk (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://slashdot.org/~Doc%20Ruby/journal | Last Journal: Thursday March 31 2005, @01:48PM)
Will the new generation of game consoles get converted to the slightly more cross-examined PC press tricks from their generations of easy lying to game press? Or will they turn the tiny amount of PC journalism accountability into the standard lying that defines the much larger market?
The *real* age old question: (Score:5, Funny)
Shouldn't that be .. (Score:5, Funny)
Yes, but can it run Linux? (n/t) (Score:2)
(http://www.readingfordummies.com/blog/ | Last Journal: Thursday November 21 2002, @05:10PM)
Nothing to see here, move along.
I don't see cause for alarm (Score:1)
If this is true... (Score:4, Interesting)
What? (Score:1, Informative)
No it won't. The devkits use the same RTOS from the GameCube.
Where is the source for this?
But... (Score:1)
Translation (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.ccimackay.com/~dgriffith | Last Journal: Tuesday May 31 2005, @01:29AM)
Translation: Firmware updates to prevent hacks, a-la PSP.
Who let's this sh... through? (Score:5, Interesting)
Any Linux kernel is per definition (of the GPL) free. That is the whole point of the GPL. There can't be a proptietary version. If they include the Linux kernel, they will have to include the source to it and to all the components that directly link to it, like drivers (proprietary drivers exist, but there is a discussion, sometimes on Slashdot as well, if that is legal). If they ship userland stuff along they can keep the source, for example for a gui.
What they can do is lock it all up so you can't mod it. Then the device will only accept signed modifications (like upgrades) from CDs or their server. Wether you do this with open or closed source doesn't matter. It might be easier to find security holes to smuggle in your mod this way. But OTOH they already mod the PSP this way even though it is closed source.
That is the big discussion about the GPLv3 btw. I guess what the FSF wants to achieve is that if you use GPLv3 code you may not lock down your device this way.
...Bad article summary (Score:1, Insightful)
No, the day your average person uses linux and prefers it over windows would be a success, otherwise, it's being used because it's just there and is merely a backend. nothing more.
If nintendo were putting XFCE or busybox on the wii (let's be reasonable, gnome or KDE would kill it) then you could make some noise.
But this is nothing but a stupid rumor, and has no relevance to the story, chances are the submitter added linux in to get attention.
Sensationalism? say it isnt so!
Maybe That's Why WII Graphics Appear to Suck (Score:5, Funny)
Maybe Nintendo couldn't get fully-functional, reliable drivers for current chipsets like the rest of us.
This is getting way too predictable (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://www.mscigars.com/)
Response: I want the source. I want the source.
More responses: This does/doesn't violate GPL.
More responses: This is why we need/don't need GPL v3
Conclusion: The story was wrong, the device doesn't use Linux, there might be a way to boot Linux on it, but we don't know yet.
So now they can pull a Tivo (Score:2)
(http://www.animats.com)
This may be a bad sign. Now they can turn off features by remote control, insist that you connect frequently to get updates, introduce new bugs remotely, and try to force you to sign up for new "revenue streams". Just like Microsoft and Tivo.
Fun with linux? (Score:1)
If it DOES run linux... (Score:1)
Regioning? (Score:3, Interesting)
Sony was rumored to use Linux as well (Score:2)
(http://xybapodcast.blogspot.com/ | Last Journal: Friday December 08 2006, @10:06AM)
Straw that broke microsoft's back (Score:2)
(http://www.public.iastate.edu/~crb002 | Last Journal: Wednesday October 13 2004, @12:29AM)
Wii will? (Score:1)