Re: Mass bug filing: Cryptographic protection against modification
Florian Weimer <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> * Eike Sauer:
>> Andreas Barth schrieb:
>>> Please STOP that. Please, I want to continue with a working Debian, so
>>> please stop trying to willfully break Debian, the release and Debian,
>>> the project.
Me too. I hoped showing how totally insane a too pedantic following of
the letter is would wake some people up but the opposite seems to be
>> The GR broke things, not me/we.
> This is quite unfair. I believe that the GR accurately mirrors the
> view of most developers, i.e. that it makes sense to treat everything
> as if it were executable code.
I don't see the difference between executable code and data. They are
both just data. Thats was one big breaktrough in computer science.
But I see data as being different, like legal documents that must be
kept intact at all cost to ensure the freedom of the rest, or docuents
describing a standard that would change/corrupt the standard by being
edited (which very loosly might extend to RFCs but requiring a rename
on edit would be right[tm]).
I don't see firmware falling in that same cathegory since that just a
programm thats executed on another CPU (which makes no difference at
all, being excuted is not part of the GPL).
PS: Could one do a clean room rewrite of RFCs?