drago01 wrote: >> "The freedom to study how the program works, and change it so it does >> your computing as you wish (freedom 1)." > > Secure boot support won't stop you (or anyone else) from doing that. > >> "The freedom to distribute copies of your modified versions to others >> (freedom 3)." >> http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html > > Neither that. vs. >>>> It's as easy as setting an option in the firmware ("BIOS") setup, so I >>>> don't see why we can't just require it from everyone. >>> >>> It is easy for you, for me, for pretty much everyone on this mailing >>> list but there are different types of users out there. >>> And you effectively want to limit those users to a proprietary OS >>> (they cannot even try our live images anymore). >> >> Just include instructions on how to disable "Secure" Boot on the common >> firmware types (on the website, and on the cover of the DVDs we hand out >> at events). > > Which is still unacceptable from a usability POV and people tend to > not read docs. > They will return it to you "this crap does not work". contradict. If you really think the steps required to disable "Secure" Boot are unacceptable from a usability point of view, how does that misfeature NOT threaten freedoms 1 and 3? Kevin Kofler -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
