intel ipw2100/ipw2200 firmware must be removed

[Toshio Kuratomi]

On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 09:41:26AM -0400, Al Dunsmuir wrote:
> On Saturday, July 14, 2012, 7:25:15 PM, Eric Smith wrote:
> 
> > Perhaps it means that the file can't be in a supported executable format
> > such as ELF?  Downloaded firmware often is in raw binary format, but 
> > it's certainly conceivable that some might be in ELF format.
> 
> This   topic   has   come   up   at   regular  intervals  in the past,
> especially  when  the  kernel interfaces for downloading firmware were
> being developed.
> 
> The packaging statement is meant to clarify, and to be read literally.
> It   means  that  the  program is not a stand-alone program for use by
> the  host  computer.  It requires additional hardware to operate.   It
> is  marked  non-executable  "-x" to prevent attempts to execute by the
> host  computer  (or  for  the security conscious, attempts to disguise
> malware as firmware).
> 
> Normally firmware is a binary blob that is downloaded by the kernel to
> that  hardware,  and  used in some manner by that hardware,  It may be
> a  program  (code/data)  executed  by  a CPU (or equivalent such as an
> ASIC)  or  some  form of data required for execution of that hardware.
> It may be multiple of each, in a fancy wrapper scheme with CRCs.
> 
> Delivering  firmware  via a standard kernel API was a big change a few
> years ago.  It allowed standard packaging of firmware, and eliminated
> the need for users to do nasty  things  like  use  programs the cut the
> firmware images out of Windows PE executables downloaded from chip/card
> vendor websites.
> 
> The  encoding  doesn't  matter  -  what matters is that the content is
> automatically delivered to the hardware so that hardware can operate.
> 
> What  also matters is that the licence allow Fedora to freely distribute
> the firmware file, without silly restrictions such as "non-commercial use
> only".
> 
> Some folks object to Fedora shipping binary blobs, and insist that the
> only true way is to ship everything with source and build tools.  That
> has been debated fiercely in the past... and the current rules were the
> IMO reasonable compromise that resulted.
> 
This seems to capture the spirit of what the Guidelines for binary firmware
try to do.  If anyone has wording that they think can make this more clear,
feel free to submit it as a draft to the FPC at
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/newticket

-Toshio
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20120716/e777b637/attachment.sig>