* Les Mikesell <lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx> [20080618 15:49]: > Andrew Haley wrote: [snip] >> So, let me summarize: we have a bit of binary-only fimware that does >> goodness knows what in a critical part of our systems. We don't actually >> need this firmware; it may or may not improve performance. Is this right? > > I don't know if this is correct or varies from device to device but my > assumption was that most devices would have a version of firmware > installed when shipped and the drivers are updating to current versions. > >> It sounds to me as though we're better off without it, regardless of its >> status with regard to the GPL. > > Perhaps, if you like old buggy versions of firmware... But Les, it's *much* better not to have the patched firmware. Apart from pissing off enterprise customers (and seriously, who cares about them, leeches and scum as they are, ignoring our high horses and principles) you also have benefits such as: * an excuse to rant, rave and throw stones at the _obviously_ incompetent NIC manufacturers that shipped the buggy firmware in EEPROM on the cards in the first place! (We never write buggy code, oh no Sir, and besides, if we write crap code and you complain about it, we can tell *you* to fix it, as you have the code!) * a justification to further spew bile on any and every mailing list in existance about the evilness of binary blobs, because they could never ever ever have been created with any other intent than take away or god-given right to have full access to everything! (But we won't argue that toss with the Government as they may shoot back.) </sarcasm tongue_firmly_in_cheek="yup"> /Anders -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
