On Mar 25, Roland Stigge <stigge@antcom.de> wrote: > On Thu, 25 Mar 2004 17:21:44 +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote: > > Refusing to distribute firmware files is just hypocrisy, because > > everyone of us has some non-free firmware in his own computer. > It's a big difference if we _have_ it (e.g. also microcode in the CPU, > BIOS, etc.) on our local machine, or if Debian distributes it in binary > form. No, there is no difference. Your hardware needs some non-free code to work, and there is nothing you can do about it. You may choose to pretend that it does not by removing it from debian, but you will be still using non-free code. > The solution here would be to ask upstream for disclosure of source code Dream on... For a few devices it could happen, maybe. But for many of them this is not possible. Sometimes because the firmware is a real RTOS, or because of national regulations or because even the hardware manufacturer does not have the source. > and maybe the offer to help with build environment integration. Else, > (binary) firmware could be provided in non-free packages for hardware > with buggy firmware. The presence of it could trigger its use. (If > there's no firmware provided in the device at all, I don't consider it > "firmware" if it's Debian's turn to provide it.) You are rewriting the dictionary to support your argument. -- ciao, | Marco | [5352 abcjNxYKdMAFY]
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature