Recent Features
| |||||||||||||
The FSF's advice to distributors on UEFI secure bootThe FSF's advice to distributors on UEFI secure bootPosted Jul 2, 2012 16:04 UTC (Mon) by JoeBuck (subscriber, #2330)Parent article: The FSF's advice to distributors on UEFI secure boot I urge any commenters on this article to fully read the FSF's statement first and not to post comments based on assumptions about what the FSF might say. It's a complex issue and we don't need Slashdot-like comment threads.
(Log in to post comments)
The FSF's advice to distributors on UEFI secure boot Posted Jul 2, 2012 16:40 UTC (Mon) by lindi (subscriber, #53135) [Link]
One terminology question. The whitepaper is addressed to "free operating system distributions" but it's not clear to me if FSF consider Fedora and Ubuntu to belong to that group.
The FSF's advice to distributors on UEFI secure boot Posted Jul 2, 2012 21:10 UTC (Mon) by pabs (subscriber, #43278) [Link]
The GNU project doesn't include Fedora or Ubuntu in their list of Free GNU/Linux distributions:
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-distros.html
The reasons why they don't endorse these distributions are listed here:
The FSF's advice to distributors on UEFI secure boot Posted Jul 2, 2012 21:28 UTC (Mon) by gowen (guest, #23914) [Link]
Speaking personally, I find it extremely hard to take seriously an organisation that rejects Debian and the DFSG as insufficiently dogmatic.
The FSF's advice to distributors on UEFI secure boot Posted Jul 2, 2012 21:42 UTC (Mon) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link]
FSF's criteria isn't a test of how dogmatic Debian is. As long as Debian has a non-free repository, it doesn't meet the FSF criteria regardless of semantic games played to make the DSFG not apply to that repository. Other parts of Debian are even more stricter than FSF in some cases including the issue of documentation licenses.
FSF criteria itself is based on the Fedora one although Fedora doesn't qualify because of the firmware exception.
Side issue Posted Jul 2, 2012 23:16 UTC (Mon) by JoeBuck (subscriber, #2330) [Link] This is a side issue. While the FSF doesn't think that Ubuntu or Fedora are completely free, that doesn't mean that they are going to pretend that they don't exist, aren't influential, or can't be worked with.
The FSF's advice to distributors on UEFI secure boot Posted Jul 2, 2012 22:04 UTC (Mon) by lindi (subscriber, #53135) [Link]
The reason why I was confused has to do with the fact that the article actually does contain advice for Ubuntu: "We urge Ubuntu and Canonical to reverse this decision, and we offer our help in working through any licensing concerns."
|
|||||||||||||