| |||||||||||||
FSFLA: Linux kernel is "open core"FSFLA: Linux kernel is "open core"Posted Nov 9, 2010 6:23 UTC (Tue) by coriordan (guest, #7544)In reply to: FSFLA: Linux kernel is "open core" by cesarb Parent article: FSFLA: Linux kernel is "open core"
> the options are "binary firmware" or "brick"
Those were also the options in the 80s for computers. A bunch of people decided that neither was acceptable, and now we have a third option: free software.
When we tell device manufacturers that blobs are acceptable, we get blobs. We need to say loud and clear that we won't accept blobs.
(Log in to post comments)
FSFLA: Linux kernel is "open core" Posted Nov 9, 2010 6:51 UTC (Tue) by dlang (✭ supporter ✭, #313) [Link]
but that's not what you or the FSF are saying.
you are saying that blobs loaded by drivers are not acceptable, but devices that contain the exact same blob in ROM or flash are acceptable (although, if the flash can be modified from the OS, the FSF may change and say it's no longer acceptable, but if it requires some special cable to plug into the board it is just as acceptable as ROM)
so something that nobody can change is accpetable, something that can be changed, but you don't have documentation on what is in it is not.
I (and many others) see the ability to load something in at startup time to be a step forward, it at least allows you to replace what was there once you develop an open replacement (and this has happened in a handful of cases)
FSFLA: Linux kernel is "open core" Posted Nov 9, 2010 11:17 UTC (Tue) by kevinm (guest, #69913) [Link] Exactly - to turn coriordan's example around, it would have been like saying back in the 80s: "... but if you want to burn the OS into ROM instead of loading it from disk, that'll be fine."
FSFLA: Linux kernel is "open core" Posted Nov 9, 2010 15:13 UTC (Tue) by RobSeace (subscriber, #4435) [Link]
Indeed, and I actually had an old Tandy 1000HX that had DOS (2.something, I think)
burned into ROM, so it needed no disks (floppy or hard) to boot... Was that somehow acceptable from FSF's POV, or actually superior to being able to load any OS one wanted via disk (merely because the disk happened to ship with DOS on it by default)? If so, I think they've gone completely off the deep end... But, if not, they're being hypocritical regarding this "binary blob" situation...
|
|||||||||||||