The Debian developers have decided to release the upcoming Debian 5 (Lenny) with proprietary firmware files to expedite the completion of the Linux distributions next release. The vote itself had several options for dealing with proprietary firmware, from a complete elimination of it, even if it meant more delays for Lenny, to an explicit waiver of the source code requirement for firmware files. The winning option was "assume blobs comply with the GPL unless proven otherwise", a principle which declares proprietary firmware as undesirable, but allows for the earlier release of Debian 5 to take priority over the removal of questionable firmware.
Scheduled Maintenance: We are aware of an issue with Google, AOL, and Yahoo services as email providers which are blocking new registrations. We are trying to fix the issue and we have several internal and external support tickets in process to resolve the issue. Please see: viewtopic.php?t=158230
The way is cleared for Debian 5
The way is cleared for Debian 5
http://www.heise-online.co.uk/open/The- ... ews/112342
Wisdom from my inbox: "do not mock at your pottenocy"
The whole thing seems inevitable because it's a contentious issue which most people prefer to avoid if possible, which means when a stable release is approaching readiness the issue becomes completely unavoidable and becomes the crucial issue to be voted on. I'm sure we'll see something similar next time.
Wisdom from my inbox: "do not mock at your pottenocy"
Re: The way is cleared for Debian 5
Great. Now it's just like Ubuntu.julian67 wrote:The Debian developers have decided to release the upcoming Debian 5 (Lenny) with proprietary firmware files to expedite the completion of the Linux distributions next release.
In fact it's the same position as when Etch was released with the exception that there are fewer of these blobs overall. It's no more or less like Ubuntu than it was 18 months ago. But it's much easier to make a highly selective quote, totally miss the context of the vote, and then bitch about it.
Clearly firmware known to be non-compliant with dfsg is not included and firmware whose status/origin is not known remains until determined.
Clearly firmware known to be non-compliant with dfsg is not included and firmware whose status/origin is not known remains until determined.
Wisdom from my inbox: "do not mock at your pottenocy"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_blob#Firmwarelancelot wrote:Not very aware of this, just curious, at which point and whatfor are the firmwares necessary in the release process?
The Linux kernel contains most drivers you'll ever need. Some would be useless without accompanying firmware.Firmware, the operating software required by a device's onboard microcontroller that accompanies some hardware, is generally not considered to be a binary blob....... Often firmware is stored in onboard flash memory, but to decrease costs and ease upgrading, some manufacturers now use external firmware uploaded by the operating system. Although the firmware is present in the operating system, it is merely copied to the device and not executed by the CPU, lessening concerns about hidden security flaws. .....
Wisdom from my inbox: "do not mock at your pottenocy"