Debian Weekly News 2004/15
Posted Apr 15, 2004 23:36 UTC (Thu) by
Peter (guest, #1127)
In reply to:
Debian Weekly News 2004/15 by pizza
Parent article:
Debian Weekly News 2004/15
I just hope that, once all of these redistributable (yet
non-DFSG-compliant) binary blobs are removed, the Debian kernels are still
bootable.
Long term, I think it's good for someone to stand up and send a message
to these vendors that not everyone thinks they should keep back part
of their source code just because it's not executed on the host CPU.
Remember, a few years ago, binary-only drivers were quite common, even for
things like network cards. But you can't get your driver into a Linus
published kernel without giving out your source under the GPL. And these
days, nobody in server space wants to be caught without a driver in
the standard Linux kernel. So the vendors swallowed hard and did the right
thing, contributing docs and in many cases actual drivers to Linux kernel
development.
Not that I expect this next round to be won so easily, mind. Mostly
because Linus doesn't really care about this part of the issue, so you can't
threaten vendors with not having a driver in the official kernel. Debian is
considerably less influential. But still, Adaptec proved many years ago
that it's entirely possible - even reasonable - to ship full source code for
your firmware. (They even went a step further and shipped the source for an
assembler capable of assembling it.) And I dunno, maybe it's just me, but
this decision doesn't seem to have hurt them in the least.
Since Adaptec proved it can be done, I don't see much reason for other
vendors to insist on sending us their binary blobs. Except for the obvious
reason: that they really don't care. That is the attitude it would
be nice to change.
(
Log in to post comments)