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

Re: LCC and blobs

On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 06:22:20PM +0000, Darren Salt wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 01:48:12AM +0000, Darren Salt wrote:
> [fetching firmware on finding hardware which needs it: wget or packaged?]
> >> Fetch every time and fetch once. That looks like a difference to me...
> > How could "fetch every time" possibly be acceptable to the SC when "fetch
> > once" is not? Are you saying that the "rancid-installer" package could go
> > in main, if it re-downloaded and reinstalled the program every time it was
> > used?  Of course not--there is no difference to the SC.
> I don't believe that I've made any comments about freeness of the firmware
> installer package (though I've definitely said things about kernel modules
> for devices which, to be useful, require firmware uploads). I merely consider
> fetch-every-time to be broken (and you can add "firmware no longer available
> for download" to the list of reasons).

Since this is a discussion of freeness and SC#1, it's differences in freeness
that are relevant here.  In response to "no difference: contrib at best", you
said "that looks like a difference", which certainly looks like a comment
on freeness.

(Unless you do have something to say about freeness, let's let this subthread
die; my response said "who cares about implementation details for something
which clearly doesn't help the software get out of contrib", and this isn't
going anywhere.)

> They were relevant to the text which you *didn't* snip. You should have
> summarised them or left them in place.
> And you've not marked where you've removed text :-\

When I think some indication of removal is useful, I mark it with a
blank line between quotes, instead of ">"; this is clear enough, since
the full text is always available.  All text in all messages is relevant
to other text; not removing text which is relevant to some other quote
would mean never removing anything.  (As your complaints about my quoting
are both frivilous and in a somewhat demanding tone, I doubt I'll respond
to them any further.)

Glenn Maynard

Reply to: