John Hasler wrote:
The embedded code is essentially a driver for the internal device and reveals only a limited amount about how it works. Exactly how much it reveals depends on the design and varies a lot.
Well, for embedded programming to make sense you really need to document
everything that
Andrew Suffield wrote:
Come on, this argument is from the 1980s, and your side *lost* in the real world. Free software is here.
It's sort of silly to say my side lost, in this context. I'm
trying to make Free Software usable by all people and have been doing
so since sometime in the late
Bruce writes:
> If we ask for the embedded programming in the devices to be open as well,
> we are essentially asking for the hardware design below the bus level to
> be opened.
That doesn't follow. The embedded code is essentially a driver for the
internal device and reveals only a limited amoun
On Mon, Dec 13, 2004 at 08:14:40AM -0800, Bruce Perens wrote:
> If we ask for the embedded programming in the devices to be open as
> well, we are essentially asking for the hardware design below the bus
> level to be opened. This is fine for a restricted subset of vendors that
> are designing e
Bruce Perens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Matthew Garrett wrote:
>>Non-free code in flash is no more or less a problem than non-free code on
>>disk.
>>
>>
> Except that we have to distribute it. If the manufacturer is so
> concerned about their code that they can't disclose its source, they
>
Matthew Garrett wrote:
Non-free code in flash is no more or less a problem than non-free code on disk.
Except that we have to distribute it. If the manufacturer is so
concerned about their code that they can't disclose its source, they
should hide the code on the device, below the bus interfa
6 matches
Mail list logo
