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

Re: Bug reports of DFSG violations are tagged ???lenny-ignore????

On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 09:04:21AM +0000, Thomas Weber wrote:
> Am Dienstag, den 21.10.2008, 08:29 +0200 schrieb Marc Haber:
> > On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 15:49:40 -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG
> > <tb@becket.net> wrote:
> > >On Mon, 2008-10-20 at 22:26 +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > >> No, really.  The kernel team are volunteers.  Ordering them to do things
> > >> doesn't help at all; one could equally well send the same message to
> > >> everyone working on Debian (or, indeed, the wider community) since they
> > >> could also step up to the plate and help fix this issue.
> > >
> > >Of course.  These are RC bugs.  I would be happy to upload an NMU that
> > >fixed the RC issue by removing support for the relevant hardware, and
> > >dropping blobs from the source.  I don't think it's a very challenging
> > >task, but I'm happy to do so.  Will that be ok?
> > 
> > You're not seriously thinking that a release without E100 support does
> > make any sense and is any good for Debian, right?
> How long do you want to ignore the issue, then? It's software without
> source, every other package gets a REJECTED in NEW for such stuff.

If we weren't doing compromises, then:

  * we would have no glibc (sunrpc code has licensing issues);
  * until recently we would have no 3d (mesa had licensing issues);
  * we would have no portmap/nfs/... (the same sunrpc issue as the
  * we would have no kernel (it's crippled with tiny offending blobs);
  * we would have no DRI/DRM for many video cards;
  * …

IOW we would barely be able to use some devices, only in the linux
console, and 1 time over 3 without any kind of network connectivity.

I don't say it's nothing we should _care_ about, but at some point:
  * you don't have the source of your BIOS;
  * you don't have the VHDL source of your CPU and all the chipsets of
    your computer;
  * I'm sure your laptop/computer has dozens of patented hardware bits,
    so you're supporting patents while buying it, you should do a
    pilgrimage to cleanse yourself from all that filth.

To add insult to the injury, the key to my home is patented, and I have
to go to special locksmith if I want to have a new one and so on, and
behind my door, there is a lot of Open Source. I should get rid of it,
it could be tainted, that would be bad wouldn't it ?

Firmwares are here because it's cheaper nowadays to have a chip that is
versatile and configured to a specific task. Older hardware had less
firmwares because the chips were made specifically for the board it was
in, and you had no problems with not having the source "code" of the
chip. So really, I see there is a double standard here, and a lot of

But sure, I still have 2 machines that use e100 at home (I think, maybe
only one), I will be delighted not to be able to install Debian on it,
because fuckwits have decided that less than 512 octets of firmware
(inside millions of slocs in the kernel) were not free enough.
·O·  Pierre Habouzit
··O                                                madcoder@debian.org
OOO                                                http://www.madism.org

Attachment: pgpo7ug3kRdU2.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: