Le mercredi 29 octobre 2008 à 22:10 -0200, Alexandre Oliva a écrit : > > Because the kernel is perfectly usable without the firmwares. > > But how about the specific modules that require them, the ones that > got this sub-thread started in the first place? It doesn't make sense > to me to frame the discussion in such terms as most of Linux is useful > without the component's dependencies, when what we're talking about is > the component, not the whole. Whether they are plugins or modules or whatnot is irrelevant here. The only thing that matters is package dependencies. > There *is* reason to split the linux package, I thought that was > beyond any doubt by now. Debian isn't supposed to ship non-Free > Software, and Linux does include non-Free firmwares. And this has already been the case for long. > The doubt is whether the split is going to stop at the firmwares, or > also cover the modules that require the firmwares. No, there is no doubt about that either. There is absolutely no need to split these modules. > > Does the kernel require the firmwares in non-free for execution? > > Portions of it do, for sure. We don’t talk about portions, but about packages. The kernel package does not require binary firmwares for execution. > Could it be that convenience and limited interpretations of practical > consequences of policies are turning against the actual policies and > priorities? It unfortunately looks like it from where I stand, but it > could be that I'm just still missing something. If so, please share > your enlightenment. It seems you are misunderstanding what contrib is for. -- .''`. : :' : We are debian.org. Lower your prices, surrender your code. `. `' We will add your hardware and software distinctiveness to `- our own. Resistance is futile.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=