It doesn't have anything to do with people hating Google. Licensing is what
makes software free or non-free. If the license for some parts of the
software is unclear, then we can't really say it's free. If that issue is
ever cleared up, then we will be able to.
Unfortunately, I don't kno
Run this command:
dmesg | grep DEBLOBBED
If you get anything back, then that particular driver requires non-free
firmware that has been removed in the Linux Libre kernel.
I have an RT2870 based wireless card that works natively in Ubuntu 11.04 and
Debian testing. When I load the live CD, I get a warning about the rt2800usb
driver missing. When I do an iwconfig in the terminal, it sees that it is
there for wlan0 even though there is no RT2870.bin in /etc/firmwa
Could you specify which parts are iffy? This is why I'm a little confused
between open sourced and "free" software. Anyone can modify and compile the
browser from source under a BSD license and use it for personal or business
reasons. Are you worried that maybe one of those licences would dow
Chromium is the non-branded version of Google Chrome. Chromium is to Chrome
as "abrowser" is to Firefox.
Recommending non-free addons does not in itself make it non-free (although it
does make it unsuitable for inclusion in Trisquel), and I'd like to think
anyone who uses Trisquel and goes out of their way to install additional
software knows enough about software freedom to stay away from the n
"Chromium also recommends non-free plugins (like Adobe Flash.) Perhaps those
parts could be removed?"
This should be ok with Chromium license right? Because if you do that with
Firefox, then you are violating their license right? That explains why the
variants like "abrowser", Iceweasel (wh
This was discussed somewhat
[https://trisquel.info/gl/forum/chromium-web-browser-freelibre last year],
and there was
[http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.distributions.gnu-linux-libre/344 this]
somewhat long discussion about it back in '09. Also note that some
[https://code.google.com/p/
On Fri, 2011-07-22 at 12:37 -0500, Quiliro Ordóñez wrote:
> El 22/07/11 09:48, alonivt...@gmail.com escribió:
> > My friend's i7 seems to work (Compiz and 2D work) but it isn't as
> > smooth as my netbook. I guess I'll need to add a PPA of the latest
> > Intel drivers to fix it.
> >
>
>
> That
According to http://libreplanet.org/wiki/Software_blacklist#chromium-browser,
there are two problems: that the license information for some files is
unclear, and that Chromium recommends non-free plugins.
It's been that way for a while though. Perhaps they've fixed the license
problem by n
I think there is a list of licenses at
http://code.google.com/chromium/terms.html but as you said, some may be of
unknown origin or license they aren't telling. Ubuntu also hosts Chromium at
http://packages.ubuntu.com/natty/chromium-browser in their universe which is
thought to be free.
I
I think chromium contains source code of unknown origin and/or license. I
dont think its non free per se but the unknown bits make it risky enough that
free distros dont include it.
As for the codecs, ffmpeg can be built to include non free codecs (such as
FAAC) so theres a possibility. If
Do the Chromium browser and the chromium-codecs-ffmpeg qualify for free
software under its BSD license? Obviously, it is the non proprietary
alternative to Google Chrome and in many ways the license and branding is less
restrictive than Firefox. I'm also asking about chromium-codecs-ffmpeg inst
El 22/07/11 09:48, alonivt...@gmail.com escribió:
My friend's i7 seems to work (Compiz and 2D work) but it isn't as
smooth as my netbook. I guess I'll need to add a PPA of the latest
Intel drivers to fix it.
That is as good as not using free software. Are you willing to give up
freedom?
My friend's i7 seems to work (Compiz and 2D work) but it isn't as smooth as
my netbook. I guess I'll need to add a PPA of the latest Intel drivers to fix
it.
15 matches
Mail list logo
