Your message dated Thu, 31 Jan 2008 15:57:06 +0100
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line check for non-free firmware
has caused the attached Bug report 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
Your message dated Thu, 31 Jan 2008 15:57:06 +0100
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line check for non-free firmware
has caused the attached Bug report 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
Package: linux-2.6
Severity: wishlist
Please could you add some check in debian/rules to prevent non-free firmware
from inadvertingly entering the linux-2.6 package, as described in the mail
quoted below?
On Fri, Sep 14, 2007 at 03:29:29AM +0200, Holger Levsen wrote:
Hi,
On Wednesday 12
On Fri, Sep 14, 2007 at 12:33:58PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
Please could you add some check in debian/rules to prevent non-free firmware
from inadvertingly entering the linux-2.6 package, as described in the mail
quoted below?
You voluntered to write one? It needs to apply a heuristic,
Package: linux-2.6
Severity: wishlist
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-kernel@lists.debian.org, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Friday 14 September 2007 12:33, Robert Millan wrote:
Please could you add some check in debian/rules to prevent non-free
firmware from inadvertingly entering the linux-2.6 package, as
Hi,
On Wednesday 12 September 2007 15:37, Robert Millan wrote:
There isn't any patch that should be required here. There is already a
script in the kernel team repo to be used for pruning non-free firmware
from the tarball, and it appears that whoever produced the initial
uploads of
Nathanael Nerode wrote:
drivers/media/video/dabfirmware.h
...
drivers/net/tokenring/3c359_microcode.h
In other words, *all* of the above drivers.
Wrong!
Those are not the *drivers* they are the source code header files needed to
link to them.
Colin
--
Colin Tuckley | [EMAIL
On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 08:10:17 +0100, Colin Tuckley wrote:
Nathanael Nerode wrote:
drivers/media/video/dabfirmware.h
...
drivers/net/tokenring/3c359_microcode.h
In other words, *all* of the above drivers.
Wrong!
Those are not the *drivers* they are the source code header
On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 10:13:38AM +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
Coming back to looking at Debian after being preoccupied by family
business, I
see that the kernel team is not even seriously trying to separate out any
non-free material. There have been severe regressions from sarge and
Coming back to looking at Debian after being preoccupied by family business,
I
see that the kernel team is not even seriously trying to separate out any
non-free material. There have been severe regressions from sarge and no
attempt
is being made to fix them.
Why don't you start to
On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 12:39:05AM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
Non-free material is being included in main for the benefit of *precisely
zero*
users. There's no two ways about this: this is a Social Contract violation.
Kernel has 736[1] open bugs, including ones that corrupt data and
make
On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 10:13:38 +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
Why don't you start to send patches then. Seems you have enough free
time to look after such issues. Fixing Kernels to work on more
(sometimes even important machines, like buildds) is a much more
important job than to get rid of oh so
* Nathanael Nerode:
The most recent linux-source-2.6.22 contains the following files:
drivers/media/video/dabfirmware.h
Probably okay, could be a frequency table or some kind of bitmap. Who
knows.
drivers/net/drgs_firmware.c
Doesn't exist upstream. Huh?
drivers/usb/misc/emi26_fw.h
On 11140 March 1977, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
I'm not sure I can take the Debian kernel team seriously any more.
What team? We dont seem to have a team.
The most recent linux-source-2.6.22 contains the following files:
[...]
In other words, *all* of the above drivers. It's even worse than
On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 01:25:11AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 10:13:38AM +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
Coming back to looking at Debian after being preoccupied by family
business, I
see that the kernel team is not even seriously trying to separate out any
On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 12:42:56PM +0300, Riku Voipio wrote:
On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 12:39:05AM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
Non-free material is being included in main for the benefit of *precisely
zero*
users. There's no two ways about this: this is a Social Contract violation.
I guess the Social Contract really is a joke. I don't know why new applicants
are supposed to agree to it. Old members apparently violate it at will for
years
with no consequences.
It doesn't make me respect Debian very much.
I am not a DD (yet), but all my packages were very strictly
On Wed, 2007-09-12 at 15:42 +0200, Ondrej Certik wrote:
I guess the Social Contract really is a joke. I don't know why new
applicants
are supposed to agree to it. Old members apparently violate it at will for
years
with no consequences.
It doesn't make me respect Debian very
On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 12:42:56 +0300, Riku Voipio [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 12:39:05AM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
Non-free material is being included in main for the benefit of
*precisely zero* users. There's no two ways about this: this is a
Social Contract
Hello,
On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 12:39:05AM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
The most recent linux-source-2.6.22 contains the following files:
drivers/media/video/dabfirmware.h
# CONFIG_USB_DABUSB is not set
drivers/net/drgs_firmware.c
# CONFIG_DGRS is not set
drivers/usb/misc/emi26_fw.h
Joerg Jaspert wrote:
Oh well, the kernel team just lost its trust, which means new uploads of
kernel-team packages dont get their old way of fasttracking in NEW, as I
now need to check all of their uploads for such cases.
I'm not sure I find this helpful.
You're not checking for copyright
Sune Vuorela wrote:
On 2007-09-12, Faidon Liambotis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Joerg Jaspert wrote:
You're not checking for copyright violations or for non-free stuff in
all other packages.
I obviously meant all other *existing* source packages, i.e. all the
uploads that don't pass through NEW.
On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 21:07:43 +0300, Faidon Liambotis [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Sune Vuorela wrote:
On 2007-09-12, Faidon Liambotis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Joerg Jaspert wrote:
You're not checking for copyright violations or for non-free stuff
in all other packages.
I obviously meant all
On 11140 March 1977, Faidon Liambotis wrote:
You're not checking for copyright violations or for non-free stuff in
all other packages.
I wonder what I did to all those thousands of packages I had in NEW in
the past.
IMHO, it's not the ftp-master's job to check with each upload if a
number
On 11140 March 1977, Faidon Liambotis wrote:
I don't consider it something needing fixing.
It is a good way to have the copyright files occasionally reviewed.
I don't think that old source packages are re-reviewed for copyright
violations/non-freeness. But I could easily be wrong.
Those that
I'm not sure I can take the Debian kernel team seriously any more.
http://wiki.debian.org/KernelFirmwareLicensing states, in part:
Debian kernel team identifies the following three types of firmware, currently
found in the Linux kernel:
1. Sourceless binary blobs with no license, no explicit
26 matches
Mail list logo
