mythbuntu-bugs team mailing list archive

[David Ayers <ayers@xxxxxxxx>]

I'm glad to accept that you have no personal interest in pursuing this.
That's fine since AFAIU you are not the sole maintainer of the linux-
firmware package.  Yet I do hope that maybe someone else from the Ubuntu
kernel-team may find interest in this.

Debian already splits all non-free firmware into seperate packages.  They then provide
http://packages.debian.org/de/sid/firmware-linux-nonfree
depending on all these separate packages, yet which also depends on the DSFG compliant firmware, which is combined in
http://packages.debian.org/de/sid/firmware-linux-free

What this report is asking for, is for Ubuntu to do the something
similar.  I (and possibly others) assumed that the Ubuntu split of
linux-firmware and linux-firmware-nonfree would mirror this.  But I
suppose that doesn't seem to be the case.  Yet I would expect it would
be easy for Ubuntu as a Debian derivative to build on the current Debian
infrastructure.

Fedora has explicitly exempted proprietary Firmware from the thier Free and Open Source Software policy. 
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Forbidden_items so it may be that from the large distribution, Debian may be the only one insuring that proprietary firmware is not included in their main repository.

But indeed, if, as you suggest, this split were already done upstream
and upstream would provide seperate source packages, it would make it a
lot easier for any distribution to offer their users a free operating
system.

I doubt that asking any specific existing maintainer to do this extra
work will be helpful.  But if we could get someone (either from Debian,
from libre-kernel contributors or the many Debian/Ubuntu derivatives
which try to provide a Free Software distribution) to help Ben
Hutschings and David Woodhouse provide seperate upstream packages (or
host support to split the firmware for packaging), they may find it
acceptable and helpful for this group of users, who value free operating
systems.

Yet the fact remains this report is about this missing split in Ubuntu.
So please do not interpret it as a critique of your work (which is very
much appreciated!) if I reopen this report.  It is merely an
articulation of Ubuntu users' (and in my case canonical customers')
request for providing a free operating system.

Thank you for your time!

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Mythbuntu
Bug Team, which is subscribed to linux-firmware-nonfree in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/179139

Title:
  Intel Wireless Restrictions:  ipw2100, ipw2200 are not Free

Status in “linux” package in Ubuntu:
  Invalid
Status in “linux-firmware” package in Ubuntu:
  Fix Released
Status in “linux-firmware-nonfree” package in Ubuntu:
  Invalid
Status in “linux-ubuntu-modules-2.6.22” package in Ubuntu:
  Won't Fix

Bug description:
  The Intel series of wireless adapters requires the usage of a binary
  blob firmware.  In particular, consistent across all of the binary
  blob firmware files is the following clause:

  "Do not use or load this firmware (the "Software") until you have
  carefully read the following terms and conditions. By loading or using
  the Software, you agree to the terms of this Agreement. If you do not
  wish to so agree, do not install or use the Software."

  As such, the EULA is not presented to the user.  According to the web
  page, one must accept the EULA before using the binary blob firmware.

  Should this not be treated as a 'restricted' driver?  Nvidia's driver
  also requires the binary blob approach and is listed as a 'restricted
  driver' as it too requires an accepting of a EULA.

  EULA locations for the relevant firmware blobs:
  EULA for ipw2100:  http://ipw2100.sourceforge.net/firmware.php?fid=4
  EULA for ipw2200:  http://ipw2200.sourceforge.net/firmware.php?fid=7

  The 3945 has a binary microcode blob that has a license as well, but
  doesn't seem as crippling:

  http://bughost.org/ipw3945/LICENSE

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/179139/+subscriptions