[Sussex] Would a p2p Kernel tree work ?

[John Crowhurst]

> which is why I qualified the question with , assuming Security could be
> handled..... so please lets not go down the thread most trodden.
> security in p2p for this question not relevant. Yet !

I didn't mean security of p2p, but more some idiot thinks that
kernel32.dll should be called USB2 driver for example. You download it in
good faith to find out that it isn't what it says on the label.

>> I know what I'd like to see though, p2p compilations, like the people
>> who crack rc5, they download a section of stored data, which is
>> compiled and returned to the server (like distcc, but on a worldwide
>> scale)
> this is what i meant, but using p2p to discover other clients who share
> similar hardware architecture and grab/offer relevant patches to match
> the architecture.

Its a nice idea, but I suspect that there would be more broken patches
than good ones, unless you have some kind of crash protection built in,
but even so, how would you know that the patch from person A is going to
work better than the patch from person B.

On the other hand, having the ability to find a new driver for item X,
simply by sharing your drivers and patches would indeed be a useful thing
to have.

It would be interesting to implement, especially to find out that you have
a new device that your system can't identify, to find a driver that
identifies it. A bit like a p2p version of windows search for
plug-and-crash hardware.

--
John