In <[🔎] 20090618025502.GD29569@khazad-dum.debian.net>, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: >On Wed, 17 Jun 2009, Andrei Popescu wrote: >> Packages in 'main' can not depend on packages in 'non-free' (or they >> have to go to 'contrib'), they can only 'suggest' them: > >If they _require_ a non-free package to work in the first place, they > should be in contrib and depend on the non-free package. It doesn't > belong in main. > >However, AFAIK, the firmware for the radeons is not non-free. At first >glance, the license looks dfsg-compatible (but I am too sleepy to be sure >about it right now). And the binary blobs look like microcode to me, > which doesn't even _have_ source other than its own binaryness. 1. That hasn't been true for a while. At the very least, there's an "ASM" version rather than raw bytes. 2. Binary blobs are non-free by default since they aren't in the preferred form for modification (a.k.a. source). 3. Even if binary blobs *were* the original form of the work and their author modifies them by twiddling bytes, they still might not be appropriate for inclusion in Debian main because of the inherent security issues. Most notably, out inability to audit them. -- Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =. bss@iguanasuicide.net ((_/)o o(\_)) ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-' http://iguanasuicide.net/ \_/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.