Bug#412950: marked as done (linux-2.6: [legal] the current kernel tarball doesn't respect the GR 2006-007)
Your message dated Wed, 25 Mar 2009 12:41:28 +0100 with message-id 20090325114128.ga5...@stro.at and subject line drivers containing firmware blobs has caused the Debian Bug report #242866, regarding linux-2.6: [legal] the current kernel tarball doesn't respect the GR 2006-007 to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 242866: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=242866 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems ---BeginMessage--- Package: linux-2.6 Severity: serious Justification: http://www.debian.org/vote/2006/vote_007 Well, in http://www.debian.org/vote/2006/vote_007, we voted about the kernel firmwares, and among others claimed : 3. We assure the community that there will be no regressions in the progress made for freedom in the kernel distributed by Debian relative to the Sarge release in Etch and : 4. ... as long as we are legally allowed to do so, and the firmware is distributed upstream under a license that complies with the DFSG. Both of these restrictions are not respected by the current linux-2.6 source tarball, and the tg3 firmware driver in particular. The tg3 firmware was stripped from the sarge kernel, it is a non-free but redistributable binary blob, and this is thus a regression with regard to the sarge release. Secondly, the tg3 firmware licence is : * Firmware is: * Derived from proprietary unpublished source code, * Copyright (C) 2000-2003 Broadcom Corporation. * * Permission is hereby granted for the distribution of this firmware * data in hexadecimal or equivalent format, provided this copyright * notice is accompanying it. which would never pass the DFSG in any way. The licence clearly state it is a binary derived from unpublished source code, and neither the source code is available, nor is there any right of modification involved in it. It is astounding how, Steve Langasek as the lead RM, specifically asked for a GR on the subject in order to know how to act as RM, and then, even before the vote finished, claimed he would not respect it. Friendly, Sven Luther -- System Information: Debian Release: 4.0 APT prefers testing APT policy: (500, 'testing') Architecture: powerpc (ppc) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash Kernel: Linux 2.6.18-3-powerpc Locale: LANG=fr_FR.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=fr_FR.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) ---End Message--- ---BeginMessage--- Version: 2.6.29-1 allmost all drivers are now using request_firmware(), just one or two that aren't, but are to be switched are still disabled. woow closing this, let's be happy we wont have a new firmware dance on squeeze release. -- maks ---End Message---
Bug#412950: marked as done (linux-2.6: [legal] the current kernel tarball doesn't respect the GR 2006-007)
Your message dated Fri, 16 May 2008 15:26:02 +0200 with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED] and subject line Re: done mission over has caused the Debian Bug report #242866, regarding linux-2.6: [legal] the current kernel tarball doesn't respect the GR 2006-007 to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] immediately.) -- 242866: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=242866 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] with problems ---BeginMessage--- Package: linux-2.6 Severity: serious Justification: http://www.debian.org/vote/2006/vote_007 Well, in http://www.debian.org/vote/2006/vote_007, we voted about the kernel firmwares, and among others claimed : 3. We assure the community that there will be no regressions in the progress made for freedom in the kernel distributed by Debian relative to the Sarge release in Etch and : 4. ... as long as we are legally allowed to do so, and the firmware is distributed upstream under a license that complies with the DFSG. Both of these restrictions are not respected by the current linux-2.6 source tarball, and the tg3 firmware driver in particular. The tg3 firmware was stripped from the sarge kernel, it is a non-free but redistributable binary blob, and this is thus a regression with regard to the sarge release. Secondly, the tg3 firmware licence is : * Firmware is: * Derived from proprietary unpublished source code, * Copyright (C) 2000-2003 Broadcom Corporation. * * Permission is hereby granted for the distribution of this firmware * data in hexadecimal or equivalent format, provided this copyright * notice is accompanying it. which would never pass the DFSG in any way. The licence clearly state it is a binary derived from unpublished source code, and neither the source code is available, nor is there any right of modification involved in it. It is astounding how, Steve Langasek as the lead RM, specifically asked for a GR on the subject in order to know how to act as RM, and then, even before the vote finished, claimed he would not respect it. Friendly, Sven Luther -- System Information: Debian Release: 4.0 APT prefers testing APT policy: (500, 'testing') Architecture: powerpc (ppc) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash Kernel: Linux 2.6.18-3-powerpc Locale: LANG=fr_FR.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=fr_FR.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) ---End Message--- ---BeginMessage--- Version: 2.6.24-1 the offended firmware is stripped in linux-2.6 since aboves metioned version. stop reopening that bug if you are not a MAINTAINER nor have any valid piece of info that it has *not* been dealt with. if you find additional DFSG violations report a new bug. kthxbye -- maks ---End Message---
Bug#412950: marked as done (linux-2.6: [legal] the current kernel tarball doesn't respect the GR 2006-007)
Your message dated Thu, 15 May 2008 16:44:56 +0200 with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED] and subject line Re: drivers containing firmware blobs has caused the Debian Bug report #242866, regarding linux-2.6: [legal] the current kernel tarball doesn't respect the GR 2006-007 to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] immediately.) -- 242866: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=242866 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] with problems ---BeginMessage--- Package: linux-2.6 Severity: serious Justification: http://www.debian.org/vote/2006/vote_007 Well, in http://www.debian.org/vote/2006/vote_007, we voted about the kernel firmwares, and among others claimed : 3. We assure the community that there will be no regressions in the progress made for freedom in the kernel distributed by Debian relative to the Sarge release in Etch and : 4. ... as long as we are legally allowed to do so, and the firmware is distributed upstream under a license that complies with the DFSG. Both of these restrictions are not respected by the current linux-2.6 source tarball, and the tg3 firmware driver in particular. The tg3 firmware was stripped from the sarge kernel, it is a non-free but redistributable binary blob, and this is thus a regression with regard to the sarge release. Secondly, the tg3 firmware licence is : * Firmware is: * Derived from proprietary unpublished source code, * Copyright (C) 2000-2003 Broadcom Corporation. * * Permission is hereby granted for the distribution of this firmware * data in hexadecimal or equivalent format, provided this copyright * notice is accompanying it. which would never pass the DFSG in any way. The licence clearly state it is a binary derived from unpublished source code, and neither the source code is available, nor is there any right of modification involved in it. It is astounding how, Steve Langasek as the lead RM, specifically asked for a GR on the subject in order to know how to act as RM, and then, even before the vote finished, claimed he would not respect it. Friendly, Sven Luther -- System Information: Debian Release: 4.0 APT prefers testing APT policy: (500, 'testing') Architecture: powerpc (ppc) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash Kernel: Linux 2.6.18-3-powerpc Locale: LANG=fr_FR.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=fr_FR.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) ---End Message--- ---BeginMessage--- Version: 2.6.24-1 The Debian Kernel Team is guilty of uploading a disjointed kernel. For the record Bastian Blank [EMAIL PROTECTED] coded the infrastructure for the stripping and the stripping itself. The FTP masters threatened to block any future Linux uploads or alternatively would launch an NMU (non maintainer upload) stripping the affected drivers. I very strongly disagreed with that decision, but the Debian Developer made their position clear in the General Resolution 2006-007, which is binding for us. In the long run it might be a win for Free Software - history will tell. In the short term this is an annoyance for existing hardware driver support. As expected none of the vocal minority, aka Mr. Nerode and Mr. Doolittle, demanding DFSG freeness helped to work out this transition nor to cleanup the created mess. The stripping presents an additional maintenance burden. But I'm sick of the arguments. Rather then fighting I'd like to see people working together to make things work, both on the licensing side (BSD firmware) and on the code side (firmware_request()), neither is easy. I'm thus closing the bug reports regarding firmware blobs and pointing the reporters to the following wiki page in order to finaly help a bit - http://wiki.debian.org/KernelFirmwareLicensing Possible DFSG violations in current and future linux-2.6 uploads should be filed seperately. kthxbye -- maks ---End Message---