Re: Proposal: The DFSG do not require source code for data, including firmware
> Actually, I disagree, and, even worse, so does the common
> definition of the phrase computer program: asking google about
> define: computer program gives:
> | * A computer program is a set of statements or instructions to be
> | used directly or indirectly in a computer in order to bring
> | about a certain result.
But Debian has a tradition of ignoring the common definition of phrases.
Have you tried asking google to define software, for example?
I think the key distinction (as far as I'm concerned) is that Debian
isn't producing a distribution for the microcontroller in my
fibrechannel card, it's producing a distribution for my computer.
In order to make my fibrechannel card work, it has to poke some bits
in a documented way. Even if there happens to be an ARM onboard that
card that's running a program, that ARM isn't running Debian.
I second Steve's proposal (although I can't be bothered to go to the
hassle of signing this message right now. If it becomes important to do
so, I shall.)