Re: more evil firmwares found
Chris Cheney wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 12, 2004 at 08:03:42PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
>> Norbert Tretkowski wrote:
>>
>> > * Nathanael Nerode wrote:
>> >> Marco d'Itri wrote:
>> >> > No, the point is that most people do not care if a firmware has to
>> >> > be uploaded by a driver instead of being flashed in the device.
>> >>
>> >> Most people do not care whether their software is free or not.
>> >> Debian does.
>> >
>> > Thus Debian shouldn't run on hardware which requires non-free binary
>> > firmware?
>> *sigh* Are you deliberately missing the point?
>>
>> Debian supports users of non-free software. Similarly, Debian supports
>> users of hardware which requires non-free software, such as the hardware
>> you're talking about. However, the Debian system itself does not contain
>> non-free software.
>
> So basically what you are implying is that Debian should support
> non-free more than it currently does, due to the fact that the kernel or
> at least a fairly sizable portion of it will need to move to non-free.
> Of course it won't be official Debian but in practice it will cause
> Debian to support non-free software even more than it has in the past
> with needed non-free security update support
...if people volunteer to do it, of course
> and autobuilder support.
...if people volunteer to do it, and a system is provided which marks work
which can legally be autobuilt, of course
> Also Debian will need to provide debian-installer images for non-free
> as well so that people with hardware that really does need that
> non-free software will be able to install Debian.
...if people volunteer to do it, of course
Well, I'm OK with that. I'd even volunteer to do some of it.
>
> Chris
--
Make sure your vote will count.
http://www.verifiedvoting.org/
Reply to: