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

Re: DFSG violations: non-free but no contrib

On Sun, Nov 02 2008, Aurelien Jarno wrote:

> This look complicated. Everyone agrees that firmwares are a bit
> special in the world of software due to the fact they don't run on the
> host CPU.

        Can you explain to me why it matters which processing unit the
 software runs on?  Why does it matter whether the software being
 executed on the central unit matters, and that on the peripheral
 processing unit gets off scott free?

       Why should it matter that the software is executed on a
 processing unit that lives on a daughter board instead of the mother

        Some people have said that most folks do not have the means of
 compiling the sources, even if they were available. But most people
 (like my mom) can't edit and compile code we run on the mother board
 either, but we do not say that people would not be able to use source
 code for the mother board, so we should not ship it.

        I can also imagine a different hardware manufacturer, who does
 have the proprietary hardware and compilers _could_ use the  shipped
 source code, if for nothing else than for learning by example -- so
 that particular class of end users would be able to use and benefit
 from the source code for even the daughter boards.

        Just because a subset of users can benefit from the sources for
 code executed in a processor does not mean freedom has become

Reunite Gondwondaland!
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>  
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C

Reply to: