Re: On the freeness of a BLOB-containing driver
Glenn Maynard <email@example.com> writes:
> On Sun, Dec 12, 2004 at 08:53:32AM -0800, Bruce Perens wrote:
>> >"contrib" exists for software which is free but fails SC#1, "we will never
>> >make the system depend on an item of non-free software". Moving something
>> >from contrib to main that does, in fact, depend on such an item is a pretty
>> >basic violation of Debian's principles.
>> It's not clear to me that the system depends on a non-free component if
>> a single BLOB-requiring driver fails to install because the BLOB is not
>> present, leaving the overall system working except that it can't drive
>> one piece of hardware. The system depends on a non-free component if the
>> whole system won't work without it.
> Huh? So you're claiming that it's OK for software in main to depend on
> non-free libraries, and not work at all without them, as long as the
> system as a whole continues to work and the packaged data itself is Free;
> and that contrib has no basis in the SC or DFSG at all?
He is talking about the kernel. The kernel works perfectly without the
firmware. Just that one module will complain on that specific
hardware. That hardly constitutes a 'not work at all without them'.
If the _package_ as a whole continues to work and the packaged data
itself is Free then the package can be in main even if it works better
with some parts from non-free. Those parts would only be a suggests
not a depends.
> Glenn Maynard