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

Re: NEW handling: About rejects, and kernels



On Thu, Mar 31, 2005 at 02:46:21PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> Thomas Bushnell BSG <tb@becket.net> wrote:
> 
> > Huh?  I'm not saying I pretend it isn't there.  Do I want to modify
> > the source code?  No, because there's nothing I could do with it if I
> > could. 
> 
> I had to modify my BIOS in order to get my laptop to work with my
> wireless card. This would have been rather a lot easier if I'd had the
> source code.
> 
> > "If software of class X is distributed sometimes burned into hardware,
> > then Debian should distribute other software of class X, even if it
> > isn't free, for different hardware."
> 
> I would say that "If software of class X is distributed sometimes burned
> into hardware, then Debian distributing other software of class X would
> not have a significant impact upon the rights of our users". As far as

I think that's a *very* slippery slope.  Think embedded devices; a lot
of them has the software on flash or even as ROMs.  Would this software
be acceptable in main just because it was available on ROM too?

> freedom is concerned, both types are equivilently bad. The choice is
> either:

> 1) Distribute the non-free firmware. Our users are happy.

Sure, as long as we distribute it in *non-free* where it belongs.

[snip]


Regards: David Weinehall
-- 
 /) David Weinehall <tao@debian.org> /) Rime on my window           (\
//  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~   //  Diamond-white roses of fire //
\)  http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/    (/   Beautiful hoar-frost       (/



Reply to: