Re: non-free firmware: driver in main or contrib?
Brian Thomas Sniffen <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Yes, Marco. We all understand the model you propose, based around the
> idea "all firmware is essentially hardware, even if it's clearly a
> file that has to be there on disk for a driver to function". An
> equally valid model has been proposed around the idea that all
> software is software, and anything that can't be touched from software
> is hardware.
1) The social contract doesn't give us any leeway here. There's no
way to claim that hardware doesn't have to conform to the DFSG, and
there's no way to claim that large parts of Debian don't require that
2) The contents of an eeprom can generally be touched from software. You
need a firmer basis for your line.
Matthew Garrett | email@example.com