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

Re: DFSG violations: non-free but no contrib

On Mon, Nov 03, 2008 at 02:28:45AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> 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
>  board?

I haven't say that because they are not executed on by the CPU they are
more free. What I mean is that we have those discussions because they
are not executed on the main CPU, which makes them different than other
non-DFSG compliant software. Then some people consider that acceptable,
some other not.

At least having a separate section kills the argument that moving all
firmwares to non-free means that a lot of people will then use non-free
and install non-free stuff by mistake.

It also allows more easily to put all firmwares on a separate media for
use by debian installer (AFAIK there is no other reason to use non-free
in d-i).

  .''`.  Aurelien Jarno	            | GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73
 : :' :  Debian developer           | Electrical Engineer
 `. `'   aurel32@debian.org         | aurelien@aurel32.net
   `-    people.debian.org/~aurel32 | www.aurel32.net

Reply to: