Debian Removes Binary-only Firmware From Kernel
mbanck writes "The Debian Linux kernel maintainer has announced that he will remove firmware from GPL'd drivers which obviously lack source code in its preferred form (i.e. something more appropriate than a hexdump inside a char[]), in accordance with the release manager's decision. The alternatives are user-space loading of the firmware via hotplug's request_firmware() API or making the vendors aware of the issue. How do the other distributions handle this?"
I agree that this is going a little far.
The firmware code doesn't get executed by the CPU, and thus in a sense it doesn't get executed by Linux. Firmware is used by an off-board processor, and thus I don't see a GPL violation here.
Consider if a piece of hardware needed a Magic Number string to start up. No code, no logic, no meaning; just a magic number required to activate the device. Can't we consider the firmware code as just a magic number? After all, Linux doesn't interpret or execute it.
(\(\
(^.^)
(")")
*beware the cute-bunny virus
Except in this case the principle their sticking to is rabid legalism.
What? Debian's goal is to be a complete, *Free* operating system, where the definition of "Free" is the one put forward by RMS and the FSF, namely: Free to use, free to examine, free to modify and free to share. These binary-only firmware components are not Free. You may have freedom to use and share them, but you can't examine or modify them. Debian wants to be a Free operating system not Mostly Free, or Very Nearly Free.
What's "rabid" or "legalistic" about that?
It's pragmatism taken to an extreme.
That sentence parses just fine (no misspellings, even!) but it makes no sense. What are you trying to say? How can such an impractical decision be "pragmatism taken to an extreme"? What would that phrase mean anyway? Extremes, by definition, are not pragmatic!
It has nothing to do with FSF style "save the users from themselves" ideology.
Now you've switched to a different target, choosing to mischaracterize the FSF's position. FYI, the FSF has no intention of saving users from anyone, the FSF just wants to make it possible for people who want to to create, use, read, modify and distribute Free Software, with the assurance that the original author's wishes (that it be Free) will continue to be honored as long as the copyrights are in force. If anything, it's about saving developers from having their work misappropriated, not about saving users from anything.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.