Re: Etch timeline is unrealistic because non-free firmware is NOT being dealt with
Sven Luther <email@example.com> writes:
> On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 06:14:08PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> Sven Luther <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
>> >> Where people buy their hardware or how free their hardware is has
>> >> little to do with Debian main. It is a problem for the linux upostream
>> >> authors to support the hardware with free source code and sometimes
>> >> they fail.
>> > Indeed. but when you mention GPL violation, it means that you are not allowed
>> > to distribute the whole linux kernel, even in non-free.
>> Hence the need to fix them.
> Indeed, and this was done for tg3/broadcom, and the qlsomething ones. Those
> files are now correctly licenced, but are still non-free, and it is this
> second issue that we are discussing here.
And actualy just recently the first one was uploaded to non-free
Now the DAK must be configured to create a
dists/sid/non-free/debian-installer/ subdir and index files for the
udebs. But I feel we are already one step closer to the goal.
Step 1: Create non-free udebs. *checked*
Step 2: Add DAK config *waiting for ftp-masters*
Step 3: Add D-I support
>> You can always write patches and send them to the BTS. If you fear
>> retribution by Frans then go that way and get a fellow kernel team
>> member to commit the changes. I feel for you and know that that is
>> awkward but that is how it is currently. If your desire to help is
>> greater than the obstacles then stick with it.
> I will only go this way so far, but someday, i will fork d-i, and declare them
> obsolet, and do my stuff as i see fit, and let them the hurdle to catch up if
> they like.
> Sven Luther
Luckily Debian is about free software so you can do that. But please
just do and not repeat the story and fork thread over and over. Even I
get sick of it and I liked you when we happened to meet in person.