[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: more evil firmwares found

Ryan Underwood wrote:

> You're right.  So go with the former interpretation.  DFSG#2 requires
> all programs to have source code available.  There is a typical and
> obvious division between a program and its supporting materials.  My
> claim is that only through a massive logical leap can we declare the
> supporting materials to fall under the definition of "program" as well.
> This leap is what is required to remove a freely licensed albeit
> indeterminate binary-blob from Debian on a DFSG basis.

> Either way, DFSG#2 cannot be construed to apply to such things even in
> the strictest of readings.  Most of the Social Contract refers to
> "software", where DFSG#2 refers to "program".  Why the verbal
> distinction if there was not an intent for there ever to be a
> distinction in practice?

OK, so allow there to be sourceless non-programs.  Seems reasonable to me,
though I might change my mind.

Anyway, we can argue about that later, because it doesn't apply to the cases
under discussion.  :-)  The firmware which has been complained about has
been admitted to be programs by everyone with any understanding of it.  For
instance, the Radeon microcode is a program for running on the video card
"command processor".

There are none so blind as those who will not see.

Reply to: