On Sun, 2021-07-25 at 01:57 +0900, Alice wrote: > On 7/25/21 1:56 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > > Dnia July 24, 2021 4:52:28 PM UTC, Alice <ali...@gentoo.org> napisał(a): > > > On 7/24/21 3:30 PM, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Sat, 24 Jul 2021, alicef wrote: > > > > > > > > > On July 24, 2021 3:21:56 AM GMT+09:00, Ulrich Mueller > > > <u...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, 23 Jul 2021, Alice wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > GNU FSDG-compliance require not only removing non-free code but > > > also > > > > > > > > to disable loading of known non-free firmware. > > > > > > > > > > > > So they actually remove code that by itself is free software. I had > > > > > > suspected that. (By what logic does removing an option add to the > > > > > > user's freedom and choice, though? :) > > > > > > > > > > > > > I also point you to some other information from the mailing list > > > > > > > > > > https://www.fsfla.org/pipermail/linux-libre/2020-August/003400.html > > > > > > > https://www.fsfla.org/pipermail/linux-libre/2021-May/003419.html > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you. Looks like there's no issue with the LICENSE="GPL-2" > > > label > > > > > > for recent kernels then. > > > > > > > > > that's not what they are saying. > > > > > > > > The first posting references a discussion on Wikipedia (which I think > > > is > > > > a third party with a more neutral point of view than Linux-libre): > > > > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Linux_kernel/Archive_7#RfC_on_the_Linux_kernel_licensing_rules > > > > > > > > I tend to agree with their conclusion, which resulted in the > > > following > > > > wording: > > > > > > > > "The official kernel, that is the Linus git branch at the kernel.org > > > > repository, does not contain any kind of proprietary code; however > > > Linux > > > > can search the filesystems to locate proprietary firmware, drivers, > > > and > > > > other executable modules (collectively known as "binary blobs"), then > > > it > > > > can load and link them into the kernel space." > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_kernel#Firmware_binary_blobs > > > > > > > > > but I repeat again please open a thread to their own mailing list > > > not > > > > > here. > > > > > > > > Sorry, but I don't care about the Linux-libre patches, only about the > > > > mainline kernel. So if anything, I would start a thread on the LKML > > > > about concrete files that violate the GPL. Then again, I don't have > > > > evidence of any such files (see above). > > > > > > > > > > You are complain against linux-libre not mainline kernel so you should > > > ask their opinion on this topic. linux-li...@fsfla.org > > > > > > My modest opinion on the topic is: > > > As far that is free software and there are users that use deblob, I > > > don't see any reason on why we should not support this and give them > > > the > > > choice. Gentoo is about choice. > > > > Then why does none of the supported kernels offer that choice? > > > > why they shouldn't ? >
That's my question. Apparently deblob is only supported for rt-sources. Last I heard, only gentoo-sources are officially supported. -- Best regards, Michał Górny
