Re: mass bug filing for unmet dependencies (Was: firmware status for eagle-usb-*)
Michael Poole a écrit :
Or maybe he didn't understand what you were talking about because you
were using jargon peculiarly. Most people use "boot loader" to refer
to the stub loaded from disk that starts in real mode and loads the
kernel. Most people use "BIOS" to refer to software that, in part,
loads and starts that stub. You used "boot loader" to refer to the
Right. I use bootloader to refer to the software run by the BIOS which
loads and starts the kernel. I try to follow the discussion, since i'm
involve with the speedtouch driver (and Marco d'Itri is the debian
maintainer of this package). I find most post quite boring, but i'm
interested in various issues. I do agree that firmwares (in my case) is
a software run inside the modem (ARM processor). But i might add another
point of view.
When I started writing the speedtouch driver, I first try to understand
what "data" was needed to send to the modem. 0 and 1's. Next, i make a C
program that would send such data under GNU/Linux. After few tries, it
somehow works. And since I have a repeated patterns of data, I decided
to put them in a file. Since I had written all that and choose the GPL
license, I thought that the data were GPL'ed too. And put everything on
my web pages. From that, how do i know that my "data" was a firmware?
and that it was copyrighted? And that it was licensed? And that license
was not authorizing distribution.
I discovered it. And the manufacturer tell me too. And since my file was
containing a clear copyright statement, I immediately stop distributing
it and remove any reference to it.
All this story is to say that it's not easy to say that such piece of
data is a firwware. And to say if such piece of data is under some
copyright or license.
Now, i'm curious to know what will be the definitive conclusion of this
thread. And what our users should have to do to use their hardware. I
hope they could still use their debian system like me.