| 1 |
On Sat, Jan 26, 2019 at 2:52 PM Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> On Sat, Jan 26, 2019 at 4:04 PM Kristian Fiskerstrand <k_f@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
> > |
| 5 |
> > My personal opinion is we should have a default accepting FSF and OSI |
| 6 |
> > approved free/libre licenses and require acceptance for anything else |
| 7 |
> > though package.license / ACCEPT_LICENSE. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> From a practical standpoint is this going to block anything used on |
| 10 |
> our stage3s or boot CDs needed for hardware support, such as firmware |
| 11 |
> blobs/etc? I imagine most packages like this would not have |
| 12 |
> FSF/OSI-approved licenses. That includes linux-firmware. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> I'm not sure if those are installed by default or how essential they |
| 15 |
> are to actually boot/use any common hardware. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
It's very common to need firmware to use wired or wireless networking. |
| 18 |
I would not want to ship installation media without requisite |
| 19 |
firmware. |
Archives