Sorry for OT-posting ! Feel free to delete...
@Chris:
>This probably isn't the forum to go suggesting
>the installation of non-free firmware.
I only partially agree. The main problem with leaving out so called non-free
firmware is that
a) Joe Average can hardly understand why his device doesn't work
b) Joe Average will hardly understand the intended goal of distributions like
Trisquel.
I prefer the Debian way of omitting firmware in the first place but leaving
the user the option to load it.
@tash: Thanks for clarification ! This actually mean the firmware loader
inside the kernel is removed for the linux-libre kernel, right ?
I understand the idea behind removing any non-open parts inside Linux. The
main reason why I run Linux (in various forms) is simply the fact that I
dislike being patronized by M$ and all the alikes. Even when I run WinXP back
then I tried to use as much open-source software as possible.
Open-source will also drive my hardware selections in future. Example: If
NVidia cards with Noveau work best without firmware, I will choose an NVidia
card over lets say ATI/AMD.
One thing that bothers me about this "we are not gonna load this firmware
cause it's evil !"-stuff:
To my limited understanding such a firmware is dynamically loaded in order to
provide an interface to a hardware device (be it a scanner, NIC, GPU). OK, a
"non-free" firmware is not open sourced and somewhat bad because the hardware
vendors did not choose to make their hardware / interface specification open.
Granted...if specs where open someone could write an open-source driver BUT
if this firmware would not be loaded as blob inside the linuxkernel but
simply from a ROM inside the hardware...what would be then ?
The hardware device would thus not require any blob to be loaded inside Linux
but would it be more free than the device which requires loading a firmware
as small blob ?
I doubt though....
It's not all black and white. If you have issues about loading blobs inside
Linux, then you also should reject all hardware devices which have non-open
firmware on chip as well. Also lets not forget about the BIOS as Chris
mentioned.
My final conclusion on this topic:
Many, if not most, "free" hardware options essentially aren't free ! At least
not in terms of open hardware. We, as Linux user, often accept this mainly
because there are no other options beside designing your own hardware.
Limiting the user to access his hardware simply because the manufacturer
resells a standard design which requires loading a part of the code as
software for me makes no sense since we deal with closed source nearly
everywhere. Even CPUs have their own propritary microcode but we all use
them. Saying a device is more free than another simply because it runs
without loading firmware from the operating system but from a ROM inside the
device is close to self-deception.
Everyone who had to do with hardware design (e.g. VHDL) knows that separation
between hardware and software is not feasible today anymore. Pretty much
every device is a blackbox. The only difference is where you draw the border.
Just my two cents,
-D$
