Re: Correct binary for Intel Core i5
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. put forth on 2/22/2010 10:05 AM:
>> [...] any software that doesn't meet the "Free"
>> criteria isn't included by default. For kernel drivers, this creates a
>> huge problem. There is no way to include "non-free" in your Debian kernel
>> like you do in
>> /apt/sources.list. The Debian kernel team makes that choice for your.
>
> That's not true. Whenever a firmware is removed from the upstream kernel
> source, as long as it meets the requirements for non-free, it is put into a
> firmware package in non-free. In addition, there's a linux-firmware meta-
> package in non-free that installs all the firmware that comes with the
> upstream kernel.
According to this, it is true. Note [3] below:
[01:07:16][root@greer]/usr/src/linux-2.6.31.1/Documentation/firmware_class$
cat README
request_firmware() hotplug interface:
------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2003 Manuel Estrada Sainz
Why:
---
Today, the most extended way to use firmware in the Linux kernel is linking
it statically in a header file. Which has political and technical issues:
1) Some firmware is not legal to redistribute.
2) The firmware occupies memory permanently, even though it often is just
used once.
3) Some people, like the Debian crowd, don't consider some firmware free
enough and remove entire drivers (e.g.: keyspan).
Apparently there are multiple degrees or definitions of "Free", and Debian
doesn't use the same one as other folks. I'm not slinging mud here. I'm
not calling out Debian devs. I'm not saying they're doing anything wrong.
I'm merely stating the fact that they do things a bit differently when it
comes to the definition of "Free". And, this wreaks havoc on Debian users
on occasion, as they're usually totally unaware of the issue until they see
a device break that was working fine before an upgrade.
--
Stan
Reply to: