Re: Should ipw2100-source be in contrib?
On Fri, May 14, 2004 at 08:01:51PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> >> The code for ipw2100 is free software. To load the driver you'll need a
> >> firmware which is non-free and subject to an EULA (for details see
> >> http://ipw2100.sourceforge.net/firmware.php?fid=2). Debian cannot thus
> >> distribute this thing (the firmware), neither in main nor in non-free.
> >> Now the point is: the source code itself doesn't need the firmware to
> >> be built, but the resulting modules are completely useless without it.
> >> So should this package go in contrib, or is it allowed to stay in main?
> > If the modules without the firmware are usable for any hardware (such as
> > a version of the hardware that has the firmware permanently stored in
> > it), the modules can stay in main, since at least some users can use it
> > without installing non-free software. If the modules cannot operate any
> > piece of hardware without the non-free firmware, the modules must go in
> > contrib.
> Um, "what he said", just so you know it's not just his opinion.
> I think there's consensus on this; it's basically what 'contrib' was
> invented for.
Thanks for the clarification...
So, since there is no hardware that can be operated by this driver without
its proprietary firmware (at least from what the upstream site says) I'm
raising the severity of this bug to "serious"...
 http://ipw2100.sourceforge.net/ tells the firmware is a requirement,
and doesn't list any exception