Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 02:44:48PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 06:08:08AM -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote: >> > I think the key distinction (as far as I'm concerned) is that Debian >> > isn't producing a distribution for the microcontroller in my >> > fibrechannel card, it's producing a distribution for my computer. >> > In order to make my fibrechannel card work, it has to poke some bits >> > in a documented way. Even if there happens to be an ARM onboard that >> > card that's running a program, that ARM isn't running Debian. >> >> One of the purposes of having access to the prefered form of >> modification, is to be able to fix bugs. > > Certainly, it's one of the purposes. But I don't think we've *lost* > anything by distributing binary firmware.
Certainly not. That's what non-free is for, and I am in full support of distributing binary-only firmware in non-free. As long as it's properly licensed, which most of the stuff at issue isn't. :-/ > Consider the cases: > > 1. Everything in hardware. You're not able to fix anything without a > soldering iron ... and good luck to you with that. > 2. Unmodifiable firmware in EEPROM. Need an EEPROM programmer, and a > good deal of skill to fix anything. Again, best of luck. > 3. Binary-only firmware in the driver. Slightly better chance of trying > to figure out what's going on, but still low. > 4. Firmware source in non-preferred form. Modifications probably > possible, but when the next round of changes come out from the > vendor, you probably have to ditch your mods. > 5. Firmware source in preferred form. Can send changes back to vendor, > everybody wins. > > (and I'm sure people can think of other finer distinctions). > > You seem to want to disallow cases 3 and 4 ... in main. Non-free exists for this. > which makes sense from a > "here are the rules of data freedom, now i must follow them" point of > view, but really don't make sense to the vendor, nor to the user. It > seems like an all-or-nothing approach. Well, if you don't realize that non-free exists to make exactly this compromise. -- Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Bush admitted to violating FISA and said he was proud of it. So why isn't he in prison yet?... -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]