Re: Bug#239952: kernel-source-2.6.4: qla2xxx contains non-free firmware
Herbert Xu wrote:
> Nathanael Nerode <neroden@twcny.rr.com> wrote:
>> Herbert Xu wrote:
>>
>>> Don Armstrong <don@donarmstrong.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, 27 Mar 2004, Herbert Xu wrote:
>>>>> Right, so for binary firmware we can file RC bugs without checking
>>>>> with the copyright holders, but for PNGs the rules are different.
>>>>
>>>> I would argue that they're not, but I'm not ready to embark upon that
>>>> journey, which is why I suggest that RC bugs not be filed. If someone
>>>> is ready to deal with the fallout, go ahead and file RC bugs.
>>>
>>> I fail to see how the fallout can be any worse for the PNGs. If
>>> anything, I'd say that fewer people need binary PNGs than they do
>>> firmware.
>>
>> You live in a weird world. :-) Perhaps all your systems are text-only
>> and
>> you feel that images are for wimps? Or are just you being deliberately
>> perverse by obscuring the difference between actual burnt-in-hardware
>> firmware and so-called "firmware" which is actually software loaded from
>> a
>> host system? I'd guess that more people need *Debian-distributed* PNG
>> files than need *Debian-distributed* firmware.
>
> Really? Show me one machine that fails to boot due to a missing PNG and
> I'll show you one that doesn't boot because we've had to remove a driver
> with binary firmware embedded.
Did I say "more machines"? No, I said "more people". Many people see no
value in having a machine which boots but can't show any graphics. As a
kernel hacker, you are not in that group of people, so I understand that it
probably seems like a very alien and weird viewpoint.
--
Make sure your vote will count.
http://www.verifiedvoting.org/
Reply to: