On Sun, 2008-11-09 at 00:39 -0500, Theodore Tso wrote: > On Sat, Nov 08, 2008 at 05:05:50PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > > > > But now we have this claim that the FCC's well-understood rule about > > hardware does not apply to software: that software modifications *are* > > traceable back to the manufacturer, even though hardware modifications > > are not. Oddly, however, in all these conversations, we've never seen > > any indication that this is really the FCC's policy. > [..] > So if people think that they are going to be able to get firmware in > source form so that popular wireless chips can be driven using 100% > DFSG pure firmware, I suspect they will have a very long wait ahead of > them. The issue is that software controlled radios are cheaper, and > that drives the mass market, so that will be what most manufacturers > will use.
Having the firmware stored in flash memory would actually be a regression as far as quality is concerned: - ipw2100 firmware was updated 4 times (current version is 1.3) - ipw2200 firmware was updated about 7 times (v3.0) - ipw3945 firmware probably had multiple updates (v1.14.2). - iwl3945 firmware had multiple updates (v15.28.1.8). - iwl4965 firmware probably had multiple updates (v228.57.2.21). You can look for others. See http://wiki.debian.org/Firmware If we ever "succeed" in getting hardware manufacturer to ship their firmware on flash memory, that would mean that 99% of users will use outdated/buggy firmware. (How many of you regularly check their laptop manufacturer for firmware upgrade?) > > And none of this is really relevent: the DFSG and the Social Contract do > > not contain an exception for dishonest or scared hardware manufacturers, > > or stupid FCC policies. > > Neither does it (currently) contain an exception for debian.org > machines, or very popular Dell machines with Broadcom ethernet > firmware. Great! Cut them off!! Let's see how quickly we can get > users moving to non-official kernels and installers when the official > ones don't work for them. Then we can stop fighting about it. The > DFSG hard liners can go on using the DFSG free kernels, and everyone > else can either move to another distribution or use an unofficially > forked kernel package and installer. That's exactly the current situation: If one don't want non-free firmwares, he/she just don't use them. BTW, I have just checked... In order to install Windows Vista on my laptop, I would have to download about 20 different drivers. By asking users to download one single tarball with non-free firmware we provide a much easier experience. Franklin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]