Re: Social Contract GR's Affect on sarge
>>>>> "Jason" == Jason Gunthorpe <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
Jason> Pretty much everything has embedded 'firmware' of one kind
Jason> or anyother. Sometimes you don't see it, because it is in
Jason> flash or ROM'd into the chip. Though, often it ends up in
Jason> a driver primarily to save on the cost of flash and/or to
Jason> ease updating it to new versions.
<hat mode="devils advocate">
So, as far as Debian is concerned, if the firmware is on a ROM or
otherwise hard-coded in the hardware its OK; However it is not OK if
the firmware has to be distributed with the software?
Don't both cases limit the users freedom in the same manner? In fact,
isn't it the case that with the second case, at least there exists the
possibility of creating new firmware without tampering with hardware,
meaning it "enhances freedom"?
Do we want to risk sending manufacturers the wrong message in that
they have to hard-code proprietary firmware on the hardware in order
to get the hardware accepted by Debian?
What about DFSG software that *requires* proprietary hardware in order
to operate? Should this go into contrib?
I apologise if this has already been said, I really can't keep up with
Brian May <email@example.com>