On 7/25/21 2:28 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
On Sun, 2021-07-25 at 01:57 +0900, Alice wrote:On 7/25/21 1:56 AM, Michał Górny wrote:Dnia July 24, 2021 4:52:28 PM UTC, Alice <[email protected]> napisał(a):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<[email protected]> wrote:On Fri, 23 Jul 2021, Alice wrote:GNU FSDG-compliance require not only removing non-free code butalsoto 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 listhttps://www.fsfla.org/pipermail/linux-libre/2020-August/003400.htmlhttps://www.fsfla.org/pipermail/linux-libre/2021-May/003419.htmlThank you. Looks like there's no issue with the LICENSE="GPL-2"labelfor recent kernels then.that's not what they are saying.The first posting references a discussion on Wikipedia (which I thinkisa 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_rulesI tend to agree with their conclusion, which resulted in thefollowingwording: "The official kernel, that is the Linus git branch at the kernel.org repository, does not contain any kind of proprietary code; howeverLinuxcan search the filesystems to locate proprietary firmware, drivers,andother executable modules (collectively known as "binary blobs"), thenitcan 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 listnothere.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. [email protected] 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.Then why does none of the supported kernels offer that choice?why they shouldn't ?That's my question. Apparently deblob is only supported for rt-sources. Last I heard, only gentoo-sources are officially supported.
deblob is only supported for rt-sources. gentoo-sources currently doesn't have deblob. -- Thanks, Alicef
OpenPGP_0x1D6802D75C10FEF6.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
