On 7/24/21 3:30 PM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
On Sat, 24 Jul 2021, alicef wrote:On July 24, 2021 3:21:56 AM GMT+09:00, Ulrich Mueller <u...@gentoo.org> wrote:On Fri, 23 Jul 2021, Alice wrote:GNU FSDG-compliance require not only removing non-free code but also to disable loading of known non-free firmware.So they actually remove code that by itself is free software. I had suspected that. (By what logic does removing an option add to the user's freedom and choice, though? :)I also point you to some other information from the mailing list https://www.fsfla.org/pipermail/linux-libre/2020-August/003400.html https://www.fsfla.org/pipermail/linux-libre/2021-May/003419.htmlThank you. Looks like there's no issue with the LICENSE="GPL-2" label for recent kernels then.that's not what they are saying.The first posting references a discussion on Wikipedia (which I think is a third party with a more neutral point of view than Linux-libre): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Linux_kernel/Archive_7#RfC_on_the_Linux_kernel_licensing_rules I tend to agree with their conclusion, which resulted in the following wording: "The official kernel, that is the Linus git branch at the kernel.org repository, does not contain any kind of proprietary code; however Linux can search the filesystems to locate proprietary firmware, drivers, and other executable modules (collectively known as "binary blobs"), then it can load and link them into the kernel space." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_kernel#Firmware_binary_blobsbut I repeat again please open a thread to their own mailing list not here.Sorry, but I don't care about the Linux-libre patches, only about the mainline kernel. So if anything, I would start a thread on the LKML about concrete files that violate the GPL. Then again, I don't have evidence of any such files (see above).
You are complain against linux-libre not mainline kernel so you should ask their opinion on this topic. linux-li...@fsfla.org
My modest opinion on the topic is:As far that is free software and there are users that use deblob, I don't see any reason on why we should not support this and give them the choice. Gentoo is about choice.
-- Thanks, Alicef
OpenPGP_0x1D6802D75C10FEF6.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature