On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 02:08:26PM +0200, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Jo, 25 feb 21, 11:53:18, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> >
> > No worries. Things happen -- and in this case you happened to step
> > onto a sticky issue which has no "nice" solution. The two extremes
> >
> > (a) Debian should be a free distribution. If you're holding a
> > Debian "CD" [1] on your hands, you should be safe trusting
> > that all the stuff in there is free to use, study, modify
> > and give to others
> >
> > (b) Debian should be welcoming to newbies, it should be easy
> > to install
> >
> > This is a point of conflict, and won't be solved as long as there
> > are hardware companies out there saying "my firmware is MINE and
> > you are not allowed to redistribute it" while at the same time
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > spreading this oh-too-valuable-stuff all over the Internets.
>
> It's more complicated than this. Debian is allowed distribute the
> firmware (otherwise it wouldn't be included in non-free or in the
> image), but the firmware doesn't satisfy one or more of the requirements
> in the Debian Free Software Guidelines (DFSG)[1].You're right. This was a too-abbreviated version. So much as to be wrong. There are those cases -- where the end user is supposed to download the stuff directly; there, the Debian package is just a wrapper which does the download and marks the package as installed. But this isn't typical for firmware, it happens rather with video drivers et al. For firmware, you might encounter other nasties, like (as you stated) no source, perhaps some form of prohibition of reverse engineering (legally void in many jurisdictions anyway)... lots of stuff contradicting DFSG. Whether that's progress or not depends on your goals, of course. That's why Debian tries hard to keep things separate. Cheers - t
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
