| |||||||||||||
FSFLA: Linux kernel is "open core"FSFLA: Linux kernel is "open core"Posted Nov 14, 2010 23:13 UTC (Sun) by anselm (subscriber, #2796)In reply to: FSFLA: Linux kernel is "open core" by lxoliva Parent article: FSFLA: Linux kernel is "open core"
Now, you may get as bored and stupid as you wish, and rationalize that a request might be hidden from the user by userland programs, and that ignorant users wouldn't know to look at log files to investigate and troubleshoot why their devices aren't working, and that they wouldn't know to search for the log filename in a web search engine and find the file along with a message that is biased towards accepting it without questioning or even thinking about it. If you assume users wouldn't do that, you'd again be mistaken, because the assumption is wrong. Just so I get this right: You'd prefer if the Linux kernel was generally modified to the effect that the fact that driver X missed firmware blob Y not be logged in the first place, just so a clever Linux user won't go out of their way to obtain blob Y in order to make their system work. So your proposal is, in effect, to keep users ignorant of their options. They do not get the chance to make a conscious decision towards freedom because you have decided that this decision isn't really theirs to make, since you have made it already on their behalf without bothering to consult them as to their actual preference. I'd say feel free to put together and publish a Linux distribution that works exactly like you describe. Those Linux users who are truly freedom-minded (in the sense of the FSFLA) will surely flock to it and it will thrive. But leave it to the rest of us to make our own conscious decisions as to what level of »freedom« we want to accept on our systems. Thank you.
(Log in to post comments)
FSFLA: Linux kernel is "open core" Posted Nov 15, 2010 2:30 UTC (Mon) by lxoliva (subscriber, #40702) [Link]
> You'd prefer if the Linux kernel was generally modified to the effect that the fact that driver X missed firmware blob Y not be logged in the first place
No, but that's one of the favorite straw men against Linux-libre.
We do log a message, and we intend to keep on logging messages, just not messages that sound like please get me file blobname.bin so that device works, but rather more along the lines of missing Free firmware for device.
FSFLA: Linux kernel is "open core" Posted Nov 15, 2010 11:32 UTC (Mon) by anselm (subscriber, #2796) [Link] but rather more along the lines of “missing Free firmware for device” I don't think this will keep people from checking the Internet to find out exactly what file they are missing, and installing that – so this is no more or less an »inducement« than posting the full name of the missing file. Your only real alternative is to post nothing at all, which I believe is ethically unsound because it tries to keep people from knowing their options. Speaking as somebody who keeps Linux servers running for money, I would much rather see the kernel tell me exactly what a problem (any problem, not just loading firmware blobs) was in order to make it easier to fix, rather than post cryptic messages to the log that make me do extra detective work. If the missing firmware blob in question is non-free, let me decide whether I want it installed, and don't make my life more difficult by having me perform extra detective work in order to find out what it even is. (It would be naive to assume that little obfuscation games like hashing the file names would make a big difference here.) As I said (and as you didn't reply to), feel free to publish a Linux distribution that adheres to your concept of »freedom« and see how you get on – but don't try, by getting the standard kernel changed, to force your concept of »freedom« on to those of us who can make our own decisions, thank you very much.
FSFLA: Linux kernel is "open core" Posted Nov 15, 2010 19:37 UTC (Mon) by lxoliva (subscriber, #40702) [Link]
Telling you that there isn't Free firmware to run a certain device, to me, is a complete description of the problem. Now, I'm not suggesting the standard kernel to do that, not even by default. All I'm asking for is an *option* to have it do that. But even that is denied. It's clear who's forcing whom, isn't it?
As for publishing a Linux distribution that adheres to this concept of freedom, I've already done that. This announcement refers to precisely that: it's a Free and bait-free version of the Linux distribution published by Mr Torvalds.
Now, it might be that you mistakenly believe that Linux is a complete system. It isn't. Mr Torvalds himself said so when he first announced his kernel, noting that, to get a functional system, you'd need a number of core components of the GNU operating system.
So, if you meant a GNU/Linux distro (or rather a GNU/Linux-libre distro, since it's the GNU system running on top of the Linux-libre kernel), I'm not sure what the point of my creating yet another such distro. The Linux-libre page already refers to a number of distros that have adopted Linux-libre. Just yesterday I learned of one more. It's spreading!
Now, would I prefer that Linux itself offered them this option? Of course! I'd even gladly help Linux get there. But Linux is unfortunately a project that prefers to sacrifice long-term convenience and freedom for short-term convenience, so we software freedom advocates end up having to maintain our own version of it. That's unfortunate, but it's understandable.
FSFLA: Linux kernel is "open core" Posted Nov 15, 2010 21:02 UTC (Mon) by kfiles (subscriber, #11628) [Link]
Holy moly! COuld you two please take your personal dispute to private mail?
I read the LWN comments through the RSS feed, and the noise from your bitter thread has shouted down the rest of the wonderful signal on LWN (well, to be fair, you and the Florian Muller thread).
The rest of us would just like to read our tech news, please.
using the comment filter Posted Nov 15, 2010 23:00 UTC (Mon) by biged (subscriber, #50106) [Link]
I hope it's not too impolite to recommend that subscribers use the Comment Filtering preference. Even if you read with RSS, so it doesn't help you directly, it's a form of voting which might be useful to the editors. (I had to abandon RSS: I now use the Unread Comments page instead. It buries most of these annoying arguments.)
FSFLA: Linux kernel is "open core" Posted Nov 16, 2010 14:31 UTC (Tue) by vonbrand (subscriber, #4458) [Link] How the heck is the kernel to know there is no free firmware for some random device?!
FSFLA: Linux kernel is "open core" Posted Nov 18, 2010 6:11 UTC (Thu) by lxoliva (subscriber, #40702) [Link]
That, it won't know. But the developers of the driver will know what firmware is recommended to work with it (it was written and tested to work with), and whether it's Free.
As soon as Free firmware is developed for a hardware component (and any driver adjustments are made for it, as in b43), the kernel will likely be the first component to know about it.
(I use quotes because anthropomorphizing programs is a bad idea: they don't like when we do that ;-)
FSFLA: Linux kernel is "open core" Posted Nov 15, 2010 20:11 UTC (Mon) by wookey (subscriber, #5501) [Link]
To be fair - if you've installed the linux-libre kernel variant then it's fairly clear that you don't want any non-free blobs so getting a 'deblobbed' log message in this case seems fair enough.
|
|||||||||||||