Henry Jensen <hjen...@mailbox.org> wrote ..
> The section "Debian GNU/Linux" mentions 3 problems with Debian

The common distros page is not intended to be an exhaustive list of
all problems that exist with a given distro. It even says so on the
page: "We do not aim for completeness; once we know some reasons we
can't endorse a certain distro, we do not keep looking for all the
reasons." Another example would be that their copy of Firefox sends
people to the Mozilla add-on site, which lumps free and non-free
add-ons together. This is not mentioned on the common distros page.
Thank you for addressing that in ConnochaetOS.

> the usage of Linux-Libre is not mentioned as a requirement in
> the FSDG

But that it must take care not to recommend nonfree software is and,
if you were to examine the previous messages I've linked to, the
consensus on this mailing list going back years has been that the
notion that the Linux kernel logging firmware names when they're
missing is not desirable. The list archives may very well provide
other such references as well.

Using the Linux-libre deblob scripts provides an easy way to address
this, with less work since the scripts are already actively being
maintained by others. (They even provide already-cleaned tarballs to
use as a drop-in replacement so it's not even necessary to use the
scripts.) But yes you're right you don't "have" to use either of
those. Feel free to modify the method used by the Debian project to
achieve the same results. It is up to you.

But if your decision is to continue to push back on this and leave the
request_firmware calls in place and unmodified, then I think my review
of ConnochaetOS is over. After all, just as with the common distros
page, once some problems have been found it isn't necessary for me to
continue digging and create an exhaustive list of everything. It also
saves my FOSSology box for other purposes. Have a good day.

Reply via email to