Re: firmware status for eagle-usb
Hi,
I'm currently (with our team at eagle-usb.org) working with Sagem and
Analog Digital, Inc. in order to get a new version out with newer
functionalities...
Let's stop that current thread that has already happened and get to work
together. The point is to find an agreement that would satisfy as many
people as possible.
>From my understanding, firmware and dsp_code will go in non free as long
as source code is not provided, hence the modem driver will be "at the
very best" in contrib and "by chance" in main. So far, so bad for the
user in the short term : that's debian people choice and I can see that
it's for user's sake on the long term.
Nathanael Nerode already provided us with a course of action.
https://mail.gna.org/public/eagleusb-dev/2004-10/msg00171.html
We are going to see with Analog Digital, Inc. what they can provide us
and want/can release as GPL.
I've begun to list everything needed to convince them and requirements
(that may be accepted or not, time will tell)
http://dev.eagle-usb.org/wakka.php?wiki=DeveloppementGPL
Le mardi 19 octobre 2004 à 01:22 +0200, Loïc Minier a écrit :
> Josh Triplett <josh.trip@verizon.net> - Mon, Oct 18, 2004:
>
> > I don't believe you can. In order to distribute software under the GPL,
> > we must provide the "preferred form for modification" of that software,
> > which is the source. From your description, it sounds like such source
> > exists but is not being distributed. This means that we do not have the
> > preferred form for modification available, so we cannot make it
> > available to others, which means we can't satisfy our obligations under
> > the GPL, and therefore we cannot distribute the software at all.
>
> <silly>What makes you think there's a program in
> firmware-xyz.bin?</silly>
;-)
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2004/10/msg00089.html (initial post
then selected answers to avoid having this thread again...)
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2004/10/msg00122.html
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2004/10/msg00144.html
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2004/10/msg00224.html
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2004/10/msg00160.html
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2004/10/msg00097.html
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2004/10/msg00152.html
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2004/10/msg00147.html
(those are only extracts not the full thread... I'm a bit sad there's no
clear decision though as the argument keeps going).
> I think you should re-read my mail, I'm talking about two different
> programs: a linux driver, with some utilities, with some data you're
> usually interested to send (for example a logo to display on a LCD) but
> that only affect a non-Debian system; *AND* a firmware program, that
> might or might not be a program (what if it is a configuration file?).
I think we all agree it's only used by the modem.
> Now, we both know the firmware is certainly a program too, but it is
> not the same program: for a Debian system running the drivers, this is
> mere data.
>
> I know this is an ambiguous position, and I'm sorry I have to take it,
> but think for a minute the modem would be running on a ROM and not a
> RAM, or on a Flash! We wouldn't have to send that binary blob that we
> don't need to worry about when it's already there.
thanks Loïc for trying, but that has already been tried in the thread(s)
quoted above.
I'm sorry of this *temporary* situation for the end user : it will have
to download the drivers with *any* means other than debian to get and
install them. I would be satisfied if at least a mechanism is possible
to have them on CD (either distributed by Debian or not) and take it
into account (with all warnings that it's "corrupting" a free
distribution with software that has *yet* not been freed).
Let's hope that we can find the arguments to convince ADI of the
interest for them to find a compromise. For example, free "old" versions
of the firmware. Any other idea / suggestion and precisions are welcome.
Ben'. aka baud123
Reply to: