b43 licensing

b43 licensing

[Ma Xiaojun]

I'm was too annoyed by someone say FUD on b43's legal status.

Can anyone help to inspire pitti?
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubuntu-drivers-common/+bug/1186779/comments/1

b43 licensing

[Rafał Miłecki]

2013/6/10 Ma Xiaojun <damage3025@gmail.com>:
> I'm was too annoyed by someone say FUD on b43's legal status.
>
> Can anyone help to inspire pitti?
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubuntu-drivers-common/+bug/1186779/comments/1

Well, I'm afraid of it becoming a flamewar, but posted my comment.
Just don't expect me/us to play in some dumb flamewar if it starts.

-- 
Rafa?

b43 licensing

[Michael Büsch]

On Mon, 10 Jun 2013 18:53:15 +0200
Rafa? Mi?ecki <zajec5@gmail.com> wrote:

> 2013/6/10 Ma Xiaojun <damage3025@gmail.com>:
> > I'm was too annoyed by someone say FUD on b43's legal status.
> >
> > Can anyone help to inspire pitti?
> > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubuntu-drivers-common/+bug/1186779/comments/1
> 
> Well, I'm afraid of it becoming a flamewar, but posted my comment.
> Just don't expect me/us to play in some dumb flamewar if it starts.

haha. Ubuntu people complaining about nonfree firmware. How many nonfree packages
do they ship?
That made my day.

PS: Rafa?, b43-fwcutter is even BSD licensed.

-- 
Michael
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/b43-dev/attachments/20130610/5b6c1320/attachment.sig>

b43 licensing

[Ma Xiaojun]

On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 1:00 AM, Michael B?sch <m@bues.ch> wrote:
> haha. Ubuntu people complaining about nonfree firmware. How many nonfree packages
> do they ship?

The difference is:
http://packages.ubuntu.com/search?keywords=bcmwl-kernel-source
http://packages.ubuntu.com/search?keywords=linux-firmware-nonfree

You see restricted VS multiverse.

Probably when Canonical get some law suit, they are argue that
multiverse stuff is done by the community so that they don't need to
take the blame.

The graphical driver helper tools created for Ubuntu has policy of
pull stuff in main or restricted section IIRC.

b43 licensing

[Michael Büsch]

On Tue, 11 Jun 2013 01:39:22 +0800
Ma Xiaojun <damage3025@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 1:00 AM, Michael B?sch <m@bues.ch> wrote:
> > haha. Ubuntu people complaining about nonfree firmware. How many nonfree packages
> > do they ship?
> 
> The difference is:
> http://packages.ubuntu.com/search?keywords=bcmwl-kernel-source
> http://packages.ubuntu.com/search?keywords=linux-firmware-nonfree
> 
> You see restricted VS multiverse.
> 
> Probably when Canonical get some law suit, they are argue that
> multiverse stuff is done by the community so that they don't need to
> take the blame.

I don't get it. So put it into restricted, multiverse or wherever you like. Where is the problem?
In fact, you do _not_ even have to put it somewhere. Just provide a script that downloads it
on demand from somewhere else.

-- 
Michael
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/b43-dev/attachments/20130610/3741a946/attachment.sig>