Re: NEW handling: About rejects, and kernels
On Sat, Apr 02, 2005 at 02:39:57PM +0100, Henning Makholm wrote:
> Scripsit md@Linux.IT (Marco d'Itri)
> > On Apr 02, Henning Makholm <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> >> It would be a better course of action to solve those problems than to
> >> deliberately mislabel non-free firmware as free.
> > So you would have no objections to distributing firmwares packaged in
> > non-us on the debian install media?
> Why would I (or anybody) object to that? The installer images in
> question would of course need to be labeled as containing non-free
> components, but that hardly constitutes a "logistical problem" that is
> worth worrying about for long.
Actually, I think it is.
That would constitute a first for shipping stuff from non-free on
CD-ROMs. It would also provide problems with people that don't
understand at first sight and wonder why Debian doesn't ship this
horribly-non-free-firmware-that-requires-distribution-licenses which is
distributed by all other distributions, too. We would need a very
careful explanation of that.
Also, if some of these non-free firmware blobs one day are accompanied
with some non-free configuration tool that needs to be run before the
firmware can be uploaded, there's all kind of other problems.
A policy of simply allowing 'any' firmware in our regular non-free
archives to be shipped on CD images would be problematic at best.
Either they need to go in non-free, in which case they can't end up on
CD images; or they need to go in main, in which case they can; or they
need to go to a hypothetical 'firmware' archive with a strict policy of
what can go there and what can't, and that would allow shipping on CD.
smog | bricks
AIR -- mud -- FIRE
soda water | tequila
-- with thanks to fortune