On Mon, Nov 03, 2008 at 02:28:45AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > On Sun, Nov 02 2008, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > > > > This look complicated. Everyone agrees that firmwares are a bit > > special in the world of software due to the fact they don't run on the > > host CPU. > > Can you explain to me why it matters which processing unit the > software runs on? Why does it matter whether the software being > executed on the central unit matters, and that on the peripheral > processing unit gets off scott free? > > Why should it matter that the software is executed on a > processing unit that lives on a daughter board instead of the mother > board?
I haven't say that because they are not executed on by the CPU they are more free. What I mean is that we have those discussions because they are not executed on the main CPU, which makes them different than other non-DFSG compliant software. Then some people consider that acceptable, some other not. At least having a separate section kills the argument that moving all firmwares to non-free means that a lot of people will then use non-free and install non-free stuff by mistake. It also allows more easily to put all firmwares on a separate media for use by debian installer (AFAIK there is no other reason to use non-free in d-i). -- .''`. Aurelien Jarno | GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73 : :' : Debian developer | Electrical Engineer `. `' [EMAIL PROTECTED] | [EMAIL PROTECTED] `- people.debian.org/~aurel32 | www.aurel32.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
