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

Re: Correct binary for Intel Core i5

On Tuesday 23 February 2010 09:40:10 Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> It's a crappy system.  Layers of additional complexity
> and breakage just to deal with the politics of "free".  This is one of the
> many reasons I roll my own kernels from kernel.org source.  I love Debian,
> but I don't care for the Debian kernels.  But I'm getting OT now, and this
> thread needs to die.

Debian was founded with the DFSG as one of its guiding documents.  I share the 
values expressed in the document, and am opposed to Debian shirking any of the 
requirements therein.

It would be nice if the Linux kernel team provided source tarballs consistent 
with those same principles.  When they do not, I am glad the Debian kernel 
team takes on the task of preparing packages that are consistent with those 

Free Software has never been without cost.  Sometimes that cost is time and 
complexity.  Sometimes that cost is incompatibility with proprietary systems.  
Sometimes that cost is lack of features.  The Free Software community shares 
these costs and eliminates them where it is legally and technically possible.

In any case, I also agree that the thread needs to end.  I will try to make 
this my last post in it.
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.

Reply to: