2010/12/17 Joshua Ismael <[email protected]>

>  On 16/12/10 09:53, Marcos David Cáceres wrote:
>


Hola.




>
>
> El 16 de diciembre de 2010 10:16, Nicolás Reynolds 
> <[email protected]>escribió:
>
>> El 16/12/10 11:12, Henry Jensen dijo:
>> > Thanks for your work. As I see it the main difference between the
>> > Squeeze kernel and Linux-Libre is the ability to load non-free firmware
>> > and as such the very mentioning of non-free firmware files in the
>> > soruce code.
>> >
>> > The Squeeze kernel is still able to load non-free firmware, but it's
>> > not delivered in the main repository (it is in the non-free repo,
>> > AFAIK).
>> >
>> > Linux-Libre isn't able to load non-free firmware, even if you obtain
>> > the non-free firmware files somehow.
>> >
>> > So, it's a matter of attitude. Do we give the user the opportunity to
>> > use non-free software if he wishes to do so, despite the
>> > recommendations, or do we prevent it proactively?
>> >
>> > For example, GNU Icecat doesn't suggest non-free plugins. But Icecat is
>> > still able to load non-free plugins, it is not prevented proactively.
>> > Of course, the main difference is, that non-free software isn't
>> > mentioned in the Icecat source code (at least I assume so, I didn't
>> > check), where non-free software is explicitly mentioned hard-coded in
>> > the source code, so the situation is only slightly comparable.
>> >
>> > Giving the user the ability to use non-free software without any
>> > comment leads to a situation where unexperienced users might be not
>> > knowing what they are doing. For example Debian help forums are full of
>> > advices for novice users to activate the non-free repository. Same goes
>> > for Fedora where novice users are encouraged in forums to integrate
>> > non-official repositories with non-free software.
>> >
>> > To proactively prevent the use of non-free software on the other hand
>> > is censorship. I recall RMS pointing out in an interview that any free
>> > operating system should allow to do anything. I CC him, maybe he has
>> > some thoughts to add.
>> >
>> > Kind regards,
>> >
>> > Henry
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, 15 Dec 2010 10:56:07 -0800 (PST)
>> > "Jason Self" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> > > In light of Debian's recent announcement [1] I and others were
>> interested in how
>> > > well the Debian folks cleaned up their kernel. I proceeded to grab the
>> source
>> > > for the Squeeze kernel, ran the linux-libre deblobbing script on it,
>> and then
>> > > diffed it against the original to see what had changed.
>> > >
>> > > The full deblob log [2] & diff [3] is available to anyone that's
>> interested in
>> > > knowing.
>> > >
>> > > [1] http://www.debian.org/News/2010/20101215
>> > > [2] http://aws.bluehome.net/squeeze_kernel_deblog_log.txt
>> > > [3] http://aws.bluehome.net/squeeze_kernel_diff.txt
>>
>>
>> I recall this discussion had place a year ago between linux-libre and
>> ututo (I
>> mean between people behind those projects), where your same arguments were
>> used.
>>
>> And IIRC, finally there was a note in the linux-libre site saying that
>> loading
>> nonfree firmware isn't banned anymore. Haven't tested it though, and I
>> can't
>> seem to find it...
>>
>> I'm CCing the lists where the discussion had place.
>>
>> --
>> Salud!
>> Nicolás Reynolds,
>> xmpp:[email protected] <xmpp%[email protected]>
>> omb:http://identi.ca/fauno
>> blog:http://selfdandi.com.ar/
>> gnu/linux <http://selfdandi.com.ar/%0Agnu/linux> user #455044
>>
>> http://librecultivo.org.ar
>> http://parabolagnulinux.org
>>
>>
> A ver si entiendo. Esta es la eterna discusión de si quien es más papista
> que el papa, no?
> La gente de Debian dice (por lo que logré entender) que prohibir la carga
> de blobs propietarias es 'censurador' y otra gente dice que el kernel, para
> ser libre (como linux-libre) no debería siquiera permitir esto, no?
>
> No, precisamente están diciendo que para considerarlo como
> libre, no debería impedir hacer nada. Por lo tanto, linux-libre
> ofusca los nombres de los archivos y de ésta manera no
> recomienda módulos privativos pero puede cargarlos.
>


no en las pruebas que hicimos en Musix, los privativos no los puedes cargar.
Sólo los libres, tipo open-b43.

No recuerdo en los anteriores, pero a partir del 2.6.31-libre, responde como
ya comenté.





>
> [he asked for an explanation, little explanation given in spanish]
>





Saludos.




-- 
José A. González

Siempre GNU Linux.

Reply via email to