Re: ITP plex86, if it complies to DFSG
On Mon, 4 Dec 2000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 03, 2000 at 12:05:56PM -0800, ferret@phonewave.net wrote:
> > Actually, think of it as device firmware; generally firmware (software for
> > and executing on a peripheral device instead of on the main CPUs) that has
> > to be downloaded at initialisation time has not been required to have
> > source available, as long as it is freely redistributable in downloadable
> > form along with the host device driver.
>
> Well, we don't allow emulators without open-source ROMs into main,
> eg vice, the Commodore emulator, is in contrib and the description
> clearly indicates you must supply your own ROM. I don't see how
> plex is different -- it's an emulator which needs ROMs.
>
> On the other hand, x48 (an emulator for the HP 48 calculator)
> is in main, and its description says you need to supply your
> own ROM. As far as I know, it should be in contrib too as vice is.
>
> Firmware I can understand -- but the VGA BIOS ROM image isn't
> acting as firmware for a driver in this case.
Right. The question I didn't exactly ask is if BIOS images, which are
explicitely freely distributable for a specific emulator (not necessarily
WITH a specific emulator; that would intrude on the packager's perrogative
to split out common elements and avoid duplication) but without source,
should be treated with the slightly relaxed standards of device firmware,
or should be treated as regular software. I can see approximately equal
valid reasons for choosing either standard. You seem to be saying that
BIOS for emulators should be fully open-source.
I'd like that too, but I'd of course like to see some discussion on the
merits of fully-open-source v. just freely-redistributable terms for
including BIOS in the distro.
The first thing that comes to mind for requiring fully open-source would
be the possibility that a desired modification to the emulator (at least
if emulating a generic system like plex86 does rather than a specific
system such as apple ][ or NES ..AS IF we could even get redistributable
ROMs for those.. ) would require a corresponding modification to the BIOS.
Come to think of it, this WOULD be an overriding reason. Anyone care to
refute this?
> If a utility was provided to rip the user's system BIOS when
> the package was installed, that would be fine. That might
> not be possible though (eg the BIOS might not work with plex).
Reply to: