Re: Bug#226417: ITP: kernel-patch-2.4-fasttraks150 -- PROMISE FastTrak S150 TX Series Linux Drivers (for Linux 2.4)
* Tore Anderson
> If I'm right, I'd object to the inclusion of this package as free
> alternatives to its functionality exist, and I strongly believe we
> shouldn't add packages to non-free when these alternatives exist.
* Raphael Bossek
> People who are not Linux centric with an working PROMISE RAID
> configuration do not care about the Linux software RAID alternative
> because this one does not work for them. Switching to other distros
> because of missing support for hardware where a driver exists should
> not be a decission against Debian. Debian is able to support
> propritary hardware but it is not a pleasure for us doing so!
Well, that support is going to be severely limited, anyway. We
won't be able to support installs on these devices, nor include support
in our kernel packages. And I have no idea how you plan on fixing
bugs in the driver that may pop up.
Furthermore, the perceived corner-case users of this package must
obviously be technically savvy, especially if they intend to run their
root partition on the array. I'd wager they're fully able to install
it on their own, without any Debian package. As an added bonus, if
they use the upstream tarball, they won't even have to compile a custom
kernel.
> Some people who are not OSS advocats will change their mind if they
> get a chance. Debian should provide non-free driver support until
> there is a adequate replacement with the same functionality. Some day
> those people may change their mind or not but we should not domineer
> over them!
Domineer? Heh. I'll refrain from arguing with you on that..
Anyway, I downloaded the tarball you linked to in your ITP. There
isn't any licence for the "ftlib.o" file. Have you received
explicit permission from Promise to redistribute it?
--
Tore Anderson
Reply to: