Slashdot Mirror
Stallman Calls For Action on Free BIOS
Dolda2000 writes "Seeking to achieve 100% software freedom, RMS is now calling for action for a free BIOS. From the article: "The most uncooperative company is Intel, which has started a sham 'open source' BIOS project. The software consists of all the unimportant parts of of a BIOS, minus the hard parts. It won't run, and doesn't bring us any closer to a BIOS that does. It is just a distraction. By contrast, AMD cooperates pretty well." For reference, there are currently two projects for a free BIOS that I know of: LinuxBIOS and OpenBIOS."
The last time I checked, GPL and the vast majority of FS licenses specifically disclaimed every disclaimable type of warranty. In any sane jurisdiction, this leaves just intentional malicious acts.
The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
LinuxBIOS is not a BIOS, it's a non-standard firmware interface.
This is pretty much OK for embedded use, but for anything where you need standard BIOS functionality, it's useless. Worse, the name "LinuxBIOS" implies that it is BIOS functionality, which causes people to try to use it in inappropriate situations.
IBM's server hardware BIOS can be flashed from Linux.
Due to the low-level nature of a BIOS, they would expose lots of hardware details. It's the same reason why many hardware manufacturers are reluctant to release open source drivers (or to provide OSS community with hardware specs).
That's what OpenBIOS are doing!
How am I supposed to fit a pithy, relevant quote into 120 characters?
actually, Intel cooperates quite a bit, by maitaining their own network cards or providing 2 or 3 developers for the linux acpi subsystem:
diego@estel ~/kernel # grep -i @intel.com MAINTAINERS | wc -l
11
If you read their site it states that it can successfully boot into *nix, Windows 200, and *BSD. Support for XP in on the way.
I'm a virgo and on Slashdot. Coincidence? Yes.
This has nothing to do with GNU Hurd, but instead with Free Software itself - to ensure that users aren't restricted by the software they use it is necessary to have Free versions of _ALL_ parts of the system, including the BIOS. If there is one single part of the system that is non-Free, then the entire system is comprimised.
Contrary to popular opinion, Stallman is the last person in the entire Free Software/Open Source movement that I would expect doing something due to an ego issue. Listen to his speeches, read his writings, hell, email the man himself and ask him if this is due to Hurd. He just wants to see people not chained by thier own technology.
Intel support sucks....
They might have some great people working on linux but the company in general just doesn't care.
It took intel a full year before they had even half decent support for their wireless chipset despite promisses that they would support it when promoting it.
They refuse to release proper specs on their video chipsets in order to let X use the proper panel size on a laptop.
Jeroen
Secure messaging: http://quickmsg.vreeken.net/
BIOS updates right now basically say that if they burn your house down it sucks to be you. In fact *all* software says this. How would this be different and why would anyone view it as anything other than another piece of software?
Cypherpunks: Civil Liberty Through Complex Mathematics. Those who live by the sword die by the arrow.
Using _someone elses_ GPL'ed code in a non-GPL distributed software project is not allowed. With the LGPL you may use _someone elses_ libraries in a non-GPL/LGPL distributed software project. In no way do they limit your right to use your own code in a non-GPL project. If you take _someone elses_ GPL'ed project and modify it, then you must also distribute the modifications. The GPL ensures the freedom of any modifications made by the non-copyrightholders of a project.
How often do we have to beat on this drum? The GPL doesn't take away your freedom to your own code: it gives others (limited) freedom to use it. If management doesn't get it, they shouldn't be herding programmers.
This sig is intentionally left blank
Companies sell me hardware.
...). Yup, DLink is now $80 ahead (at least on me).
Not (commodity) driver software.
I would STILL buy hardware -- in fact I require that any hardware
I buy be supported by open systems. No support == no sale.
I really, truly, don't want the hardware vendor writing drivers.
(except as an example of how the hardware is EXPECTED to be used).
Take Intel as an example. Intel supplies some proto-code to illustrated
how protected mode works. But Intel does NOT supply Windows, BSD, Linux
etc with the processor chip.
Does the GPL hurt at all under these rules? Perhaps a company is afraid
that simply having access to the register specs is going to allow
a competitor to build a compatible chip and sell it for less money.
Figure 6 months to tape out, test, write documentation, market -- and
think about the cycle on existing chips! It won't make any difference,
unless the original chip is SO simple that it is trivial and not worth
the purchase price.
Also, patents on chip algo implementations can be obtained (I even
have some, so it 'aint that difficult!)
Perhaps you want me to believe that Intel can compete whilst opening
a register spec on the processor itself, while NVIDIA and ATI can't compete?
I'll even grant you that... but, personally, I only use open drivers.
(more secure, crashes can be dealt with, and have a future). Even if the
open driver solution costs WAY more.
For example, I use the DLink 800+ Ethernet to Wireless Bridge, rather than
a closed-source 802.11b solution. Cost? $20 vs. $100. Benefit? The open
solution will work with any platform (PC, SPARC, Windows, Solaris, BSD,
Oh, and the software within the 800 isn't even `GPL'! Its simply a bridge
from 802.11b standard and Ethernet standard.
As to software - low level OS and driver and commodity software must
be open source. Specific applications may be distributed in a more rigid
manner (although I STILL prefer source distribution, not knowing if the
vendor is going out of business, or what her plans are -- escrow would
work as well).
Ratboy
Just another "Cubible(sic) Joe" 2 17 3061