[interested_observer]

Yes, this came out on April 1st.... But, it does appear that enough folks have been loading and running, that it is probably not a joke. Using Magic Latern, folks have loaded a bootloader, that in turn loads and runs a Linux distribution (for an ARM processor) on the co-processor within a Canon body (off the SD card). That is the reason that it works on Canon and will not work on any other body - as none of the others have a dual processor architecture.

• Linux on your Canon DSLR? Why not?

.... which means that virus, trojans, hacks, root kits etc. will soon follow, providing yet another avenue for system infections.

[boriscleto]

I think there's a Linux distro for my toaster oven.

[Uluru]

Excellent!
Canon, a camera for penguins.

[lightbox]

What problem is this solving?

[willskywalker93]

What problem is this solving?

Uh... Global Linux takeover. Soon you'll be able to run backtrack distributions from your camera. That way you can hack wifi to upload your pictures.

But seriously, I think it's another chapter in the age old saga of "Oh, there's a digital device. Why not Linux?"

[stevebrot]

Interesting. The next step would be to displace the Canon OS and run the camera as a programmable device with incredible peripherals.


Steve

[tuco]

I'd think FreeBSD would be a better choice. The restrictive GNU license found on Linux would no doubt be both problematic and a pain in the * for Canon's corporate lawyers; whereas, FreeBSD and its variants have a simple, one-liner license giving you the ultimate freedom to use and distribute a derivative without hardly any strings attached by comparison.


-

---

Last edited by tuco; 04-04-2015 at 01:30 PM. Reason: Sp

[Volker76]

I'd think FreeBSD would be a better choice. The restrictive GNU license found on Linux would no doubt be both problematic and a pain in the * for Canon's corporate lawyers; whereas, FreeBSD and its variants have a simple, one-liner license giving you the ultimate freedom to use and distribute a derivative without hardly any strings attached by comparison.


-

the ultimate freedom to take away any freedom. There is a reason why linux pwned freebsd, despite bsd's head start. GPL furthers collaboration. MIT licence furthers division and isolation.

Btw, as long as the camera does not run a full KDE desktop: I don't care.

[Venom3300]

and their dynamic range is still less than 12EV. Congratz... lol

[lightbox]

I dunno... it just seems like a waste of time/effort. I happen to like Linux and have had some kind of distribution alongside my main/host OS for years (currently running Arch). I'm all for tinkering and hacking devices to do cool stuff. But honestly, what can be done with this that can't already be done better on a dedicated device like a tablet or even an Android phone? I can't imagine a DSLR owner who doesn't own at least one dedicated computing device with a bigger screen, better peripherals, networking, etc. I'm still missing the problem that this is a solution to. Angry birds? I can do it better on my phone. Photo editing? Ditto.

What am I missing?

[tuco]

the ultimate freedom to take away any freedom. There is a reason why linux pwned freebsd, despite bsd's head start. GPL furthers collaboration. MIT licence furthers division and isolation.

Btw, as long as the camera does not run a full KDE desktop: I don't care.

I'm finding hard to relate anything you said there to what I said. I was counting who has the most constraints and strings attached to their licenses and you are talking about what?

[lightbox]

I was counting who has the most constraints and strings attached to their licenses

That doesn't seem relevant here, either. This is a 3rd party modification and I presume Canon doesn't endorse or support it, either way. Why do Canon's lawyers, as you claim, care whether this modification is using GPL or otherwise?

[tuco]

Why do Canon's lawyers, as you claim, care whether this modification is using GPL or otherwise?

The corporate world does not like to be forced into giving out their source code. If you create and distribute derivative work from GPL licensed code, you have to make your modifications available to the public. There is a way around having to not give out the text to that source code but a binary instead if I recall correctly but means following a bunch of rules on how you compile an link your code. With a BSD license you don't have to worry about any of that at all.

Here, I suspect, is what Volker76 probably had on his mind. The ideology of freedom vs the pragmatic view of it. The pragmatic view is the fewer the constraints the more free it is. The ideological view uses constraints to force a level of freedom whether you want it or not.

[lightbox]

I must have missed something in my reading of what this modification is. I took it to be a 3rd party / add-on that does not interface directly with Canon software. It sounds like what you're talking about is Canon open-sourcing their platform.

[tuco]

I must have missed something in my reading of what this modification is. I took it to be a 3rd party / add-on that does not interface directly with Canon software. It sounds like what you're talking about is Canon open-sourcing their platform.

You read it right. I read it wrong.