Re: request_firmware() backport to 2.4

[Jeff Garzik]

Jean Tourrilhes wrote:
> Marcelo wrote :
>
> > On 1 Sep 2003, Marcel Holtmann wrote:
> >
> >
> > > no, the bfubase.frm is the original firmware file from AVM. This file
> > > have to be placed somewhere on the filesystem. 
> >
> > Right, and without placing the file somewhere on the filesystem bfusb
> > 2.4.22 users wont have 2.4.23 working without "issues".
>
>
> 	But various high level kernel people, such as Jeff, have
> decided that binary firmwares *must* be removed from the kernel
> because of legal "issues" (GPL == source available). In 2.6.X, it
> seems that the tolerance towards this "issue" will end, so all those
> nasty details will have to work.

Well, I wouldn't put it that strongly.

It's more like, at least in my own case, the Debian people make a stink 
about the legality of non-GPL'd firmwares.  And certain people, and at 
certain times, have refused patches related to legality of firmwares. 
AND, on top of all that, as a programmer I hate seeing these ugly BLOBs 
embedded in C code, and would much rather see them removed from the C 
source code.

So, I "prefer" that firmware leaves the kernel, but that's just my 
personal opinion.  There has been no decision made AFAIK, and I don't 
recall Marcelo or Linus speaking definitively on the subject.


> 	Of course, 2.4.X is more "don't rock the boat".

Agreed...

	Jeff



-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/