[Fedora-legal-list] Update to Binary Firmware Exceptions

Adam Williamson awilliam at redhat.com
Thu Oct 25 22:43:58 UTC 2012

On Thu, 2012-10-25 at 17:10 -0400, Tom Callaway wrote:
> On 10/24/2012 06:30 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > I don't want to sound too alarmist, but these laser-focused changes
> > aimed at the Pi seem slightly worrying to me in the context of:
> > 
> > http://airlied.livejournal.com/76383.html
> > 
> > If the firmware is as useless and anti-F/OSS as Dave suggests, do we
> > really want to be letting it in? Should we be drawing a distinction
> > between the two kinds of firmware Dave identifies in his blog post?
> The firmware for the raspberrypi is necessary to boot anything on the
> device. This is different from the videocore libs that were previously
> proprietary but are now BSD. The videocore libs are kindof awful in all
> the ways that David Airlie covers, but you can run Fedora on the
> Raspberry Pi without them. You cannot even boot Fedora on the raspberry
> pi without the firmware present on the SD card (and thus, part of the
> "Fedora" image that we would distribute for that platform).
> At no point was I trying to extend the guidelines to support including
> the proprietary videocore libs.

Ah, thanks. Sorry, I didn't realize the distinction. No problems, then.
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora

More information about the devel mailing list