----- "Steve Langasek" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This says that the *license* must comply with the DFSG. It specifically > does *not* say that the *firmware* complies with the DFSG, allowing us to > ship firmware in main for which source code was unavailable if it otherwise > complied with the DFSG. > > So yes, the etch release did violate the Social Contract (including the DFSG > by reference) as it stood.
To have any standing you must show that the firmware in question is not an executable. For data lookup tables, or something like that... sure, maybe. If the firmware runs is executed by a Turing complete CPU attached to the system then it is a binary like any other and should be subject to the same rules anything else is! Modern 3Ware cards have a PowerPC CPU. Claiming that their firmware is not an executable is a distortion. -- Ean Schuessler, CTO Brainfood.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.brainfood.com - 214-720-0700 x 315 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
