Re: non-free firmware
On Wed, Jan 11, 2006 at 12:00:06PM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> Source code is clearly mandatory under the DFSG for programs.
Actually, that's a bit of a tricky one. I've written small programs
entirely in binary, for which there was no source code. Are you
claiming that such programs could not possibly be DFSG-free? Because,
if so, I strongly disagree. The GPL only refers to the "preferred
form of the work for making modifications to it." In the case of a
program written by hand in binary, binary would seem to qualify.
But in general, yes, if a program HAS source code, then that source
code should be properly available under a DFSG license for the program
to be considered DFSG-compliant. Most binary blobs I've seen in
drivers are large enough that I would refuse to believe they were
coded by hand in binary.
--
Chris Waters | Pneumonoultra- osis is too long
xtifr@debian.org | microscopicsilico- to fit into a single
or xtifr@speakeasy.net | volcaniconi- standalone haiku
Reply to: