Overclock.net › Forums › Software, Programming and Coding › Operating Systems › Linux, Unix › echo "The `uname` Club" (NEW POLL)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

echo "The `uname` Club" (NEW POLL) - Page 77

Poll Results: How long have you been using your current, main installation?

 
  • 24% (50)
    less then a month
  • 23% (47)
    less then six months
  • 14% (30)
    less then a year
  • 24% (49)
    less then three years
  • 13% (27)
    three years+
203 Total Votes  
post #761 of 4043
Quote:
Originally Posted by xeekei View Post

Then I guess I've totally misunderstood the GPL licence, because by my understanding that shouldn't be legally possible. confused.gif

Those drivers are loaded as "kernel objects" (external libraries with a .ko extension) and thus not part of the GPLed code. The upshot of that is that you can install and uninstall drivers without having to recompile the kernel and even hot load drivers without having to reboot.

That all said, you can patch non-GPL code into GPL code. You're just not allowed to redistribute the result.
Edited by Plan9 - 12/13/12 at 1:53pm
post #762 of 4043
Such a shame. I'm all for 100% free software, but only if it's plausible. I'm forced to run the closed source Catalyst drivers because the open source ones are not good enough.
post #763 of 4043
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrl1357 View Post

I recommend LMDE, Debian doesn't contain non-free firmware, which is fine for us but not for the layman. Fedora on the other hand has this firmware, but has repos way to small for my liking, so you have to rpmfusion. Again, not a problem for us, but for these windows gamers to switch or try it it needs to be effortless
EDIT--
not to mention fedora has the same kind of bloat that can be found on ubuntu. but they don't spy on your keyboard, send you ads in your menu or have paid apps in a 'store' plus its not that hard to cut out

To be clear, Debian does have the firmware available, but its in a separate package you have to install (which is called firmware-linux). It is outside the main archive Debian has, but in the non-free archive, which is easily added and supported by Debian. It's there because they are non-free according to Debian's policies. It is debatable how useful it is (personally I install the package on my machines), but at least you have the choice.

Quote:
Originally Posted by xeekei View Post

Then I guess I've totally misunderstood the GPL licence, because by my understanding that shouldn't be legally possible. confused.gif
As far as I know, the GPL allows you to distribute other files with your code. The blobs are firmware run on other processors in your hardware, and thus can be considered other programs. It's a funny situation for sure, but I don't think anyone says it's wrong legally. The FSF will tell you the blobs are morally wrong. My opinion is more middle ground about it.
It's similar to how you can distribute your assets along with your GPL code, and your art assets can be under other licenses, for instance under a Creative Commons license (which is not GPL compatible).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Plan9 View Post

Those drivers are loaded as "kernel objects" (external libraries with a .ko extension) and thus not part of the GPLed code. The upshot of that is that you can install and uninstall drivers without having to recompile the kernel and even hot load drivers without having to reboot.
That all said, you can patch non-GPL code into GPL code. You're just not allowed to redistribute the result.
No quite. In this case we are talking about firmware blobs, run on other co-processors in your hardware (your wireless card, your graphics card, etc). These implement specific functionality (for wireless, implementing the encryption protocols would be one thing they may do). It's very custom code for often custom architectures (not x86/arm). They are not external modules (the kernel objects you are thinking about, including both in tree (radeon.ko) and out of tree (fglrx.ko) pieces. Note in tree can be compiled in and not a module on your system). You can find them in /lib/firmware (at least on my systems, YMMV).


Personally, while I'd like all software to be open, I'm realistic and accept firmware blobs as necessary for now. There are likely very many secrets included in them, and thus vary hard to open up. They also do very special things on (often very) specialized hardware. While I'd like all my software in my PC's to be open, I rather get everything on main processor first, and move on from there.
post #764 of 4043
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJD View Post


No quite. In this case we are talking about firmware blobs, run on other co-processors in your hardware (your wireless card, your graphics card, etc). These implement specific functionality (for wireless, implementing the encryption protocols would be one thing they may do). It's very custom code for often custom architectures (not x86/arm). They are not external modules (the kernel objects you are thinking about, including both in tree (radeon.ko) and out of tree (fglrx.ko) pieces. Note in tree can be compiled in and not a module on your system). You can find them in /lib/firmware (at least on my systems, YMMV).
I know what firmware is and how hardware works. I just skimmed his post and thought he was talking about open source drivers vs closed source drivers. (eg graphics card drivers). Hence why I specifically referred to "drivers" in my post, and not firmware

Quote:
Originally Posted by MJD View Post

Personally, while I'd like all software to be open, I'm realistic and accept firmware blobs as necessary for now. There are likely very many secrets included in them, and thus vary hard to open up. They also do very special things on (often very) specialized hardware. While I'd like all my software in my PC's to be open, I rather get everything on main processor first, and move on from there.
Whether having open source drivers / firmware actually gives away any secrets is actually a matter of great debate. Many hackers* argue that you don't glean much more about the hardware architecture than you would by normal reverse engineering processes.

* and I use the term in it's literal sense rather than the shady pop culture context that the press has confused people with.
Edited by Plan9 - 12/15/12 at 2:10am
post #765 of 4043
Quote:
Originally Posted by Plan9 View Post

I know what firmware is and how hardware works. I just skimmed his post and thought he was talking about open source drivers vs closed source drivers. (eg graphics card drivers). Hence why I specifically referred to "drivers" in my post, and not firmware
Understood. I just wanted to prevent confusion since we were talking about the firmware blobs, not closed source drivers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Plan9 View Post

Whether having open source drivers / firmware actually gives away any secrets is actually a matter of great debate. Many hackers* argue that you don't glean much more about the hardware architecture than you would by normal reverse engineering processes.
* and I use the term in it's literal sense rather than the shady pop culture context that the press has confused people with.
True, but I'd expect more secrets out of the firmware blobs then out of the drivers themselves. It's also much more difficult to deal with the firmware, thus why I have the priorities I do.
post #766 of 4043
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJD View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by jrl1357 View Post

I recommend LMDE, Debian doesn't contain non-free firmware, which is fine for us but not for the layman. Fedora on the other hand has this firmware, but has repos way to small for my liking, so you have to rpmfusion. Again, not a problem for us, but for these windows gamers to switch or try it it needs to be effortless
EDIT--
not to mention fedora has the same kind of bloat that can be found on ubuntu. but they don't spy on your keyboard, send you ads in your menu or have paid apps in a 'store' plus its not that hard to cut out

To be clear, Debian does have the firmware available, but its in a separate package you have to install (which is called firmware-linux). It is outside the main archive Debian has, but in the non-free archive, which is easily added and supported by Debian. It's there because they are non-free according to Debian's policies. It is debatable how useful it is (personally I install the package on my machines), but at least you have the choice.

uh, to be clear, the firmware is not a part of debian, and they have made a point of making that fact to everyone blatantly clear.

and it's not debatable. if it does any good or not depends on the hardware, it's not some judgement thing, if you take it is, but if it helps or hurts performance is in no way debatable. either it does or it doesn't depending on the machine.

not to mention this is about a new user installing debian, so that fact that there internet will be available after they try and do a netinstall is of little help. which is why for new users I recommend LMDE, which is based off of debian's testing branch, with the package (called firmware-linux-nonfree) plus other non-FOSS stuff preinstalled for the noob.

anyways, new poll! I decided just after switching to urxvt, and I don't think I'm going back anytime soon
post #767 of 4043
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrl1357 View Post

anyways, new poll! I decided just after switching to urxvt, and I don't think I'm going back anytime soon

Welcome to Rxvt thumb.gif
post #768 of 4043
I voted for xfce4-terminal, since that's what came with my DE, and it's really nice. I like the transparency. smile.gif
post #769 of 4043
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shrak View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by jrl1357 View Post

anyways, new poll! I decided just after switching to urxvt, and I don't think I'm going back anytime soon

Welcome to Rxvt thumb.gif

cheers.gif
the amount of control in settings vs most terminals is amazing, the it uses almost no ram!
Edited by jrl1357 - 12/15/12 at 10:05pm
post #770 of 4043
Quote:
Originally Posted by xeekei View Post

I voted for xfce4-terminal, since that's what came with my DE, and it's really nice. I like the transparency. smile.gif

I have to agree. Besides that, probably urxvt, if you're using a standalone window manager.
Arcadius
(8 items)
 
Cyrillus
(7 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i5-3570k ASUS P8Z77-V LE MSI Geforce GTX 660 Ti Corsair Vengeance Blue 
Hard DriveOSPowerCase
WD Caviar Blue Arch Linux (XFCE) Corsair GS600 Corsair Carbide 300R 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-3317U Proprietary HD Graphics 4000 Proprietary 
Hard DriveOSCase
520 Series FreeBSD (GNOME) Zenbook Prime UX31A-DH51 
  hide details  
Reply
Arcadius
(8 items)
 
Cyrillus
(7 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i5-3570k ASUS P8Z77-V LE MSI Geforce GTX 660 Ti Corsair Vengeance Blue 
Hard DriveOSPowerCase
WD Caviar Blue Arch Linux (XFCE) Corsair GS600 Corsair Carbide 300R 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-3317U Proprietary HD Graphics 4000 Proprietary 
Hard DriveOSCase
520 Series FreeBSD (GNOME) Zenbook Prime UX31A-DH51 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Linux, Unix
Overclock.net › Forums › Software, Programming and Coding › Operating Systems › Linux, Unix › echo "The `uname` Club" (NEW POLL)