[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I realize that hardware includes non-free firmware in rom, but I think
that observation misses the point. Firmware in rom isn't being^M
distributed by the debian project. The first problem I see with debian
The good old what I don't see cannot hurt me argument.
and
Le sam 26 août 2006 11:37, Josselin Mouette a écrit :
I propose the following amendment to Steve's proposal.
THE DEBIAN PROJECT therefore,
1. reaffirms its dedication to providing a 100% free system
to our users according to our Social Contract and the DFSG; and
2.
Marco d'Itri [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[...] de Raadt firmware I have found:
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/10/29/1098992287663.html
And http://kerneltrap.org/node/6550:
Thanks. (Neither were in the OpenBSD list archives...)
--
MJR/slef
My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
I think it is ludicrous to pretend that firmware is not a program.
Suppose we had in our possession the source code and an assembler for
it. Surely then it would be obviously a program.
thomas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
4. determines that for the purposes of DFSG #2, device firmware
shall also not be considered a program.
I am bothered that there is never a definition of firmware here. It
seems to me that if you gave one, it would be something like:
firmware
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
As you and I discussed previously on IRC, I don't agree with this amendment.
The premise of my proposal is that we are *not* granting an exception nor
redefining any terms, we are merely recognizing a latent definition of
programs that has guided
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Notice that the bios or other firmware used on most machines today is also
refered as firmware. The original definition is, i believe, any kind of code
provided by the vendor of said device, and on which he has full control, so
firmware was non-free by
On Mon, Aug 28, 2006 at 02:26:42PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Notice that the bios or other firmware used on most machines today is also
refered as firmware. The original definition is, i believe, any kind of code
provided by the vendor of said
On Mon, Aug 28, 2006 at 02:23:10PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
4. determines that for the purposes of DFSG #2, device firmware
shall also not be considered a program.
I am bothered that there is never a definition of firmware here.
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In cases like hte NLSU thingy, the firmware goes to include the whole linux +
userland stack on top of whatever they use for booting, since it is held in
the flash of the board.
Wow. I thought that doesn't run on the main CPU was entirely
indefensible.
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The idea is that the firmware is all the software and other softwarish
information which the vendor provides to make use of the board he sells you.
I see. If I buy a standard-issue Dell computer, then Windows is
firmware, right? (Dell does provide it,
On Mon, Aug 28, 2006 at 03:21:35PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In cases like hte NLSU thingy, the firmware goes to include the whole linux
+
userland stack on top of whatever they use for booting, since it is held in
the flash of the board.
On Mon, Aug 28, 2006 at 03:25:05PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The idea is that the firmware is all the software and other softwarish
information which the vendor provides to make use of the board he sells you.
I see. If I buy a standard-issue
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think it is ludicrous to pretend that firmware is not a program.
I am not sure, it's not very funny to me. But it worked pretty well
until you and a few other people started pretending we have been
confused for all these years and actually meant something else.
Suppose
Nathanael Nerode writes:
If you want to amend the DFSG to state
3. Source Code
The program must include source code, and must allow distribution in source
code as well as compiled form. However, this requirement does not apply to
firmware, defined as insert your pet exemption here.
I
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Tue, 22 Aug 2006 15:18:04 -0700, Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
snip
4. determines that for the purposes of DFSG #2, device
firmware shall also not be considered a program.
This would require us to amend the foundation document
16 matches
Mail list logo
