BLAG Forum Index
->
non-free
Post a reply
Username
Subject
Message body
Font colour:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Indigo
Violet
White
Black
Font size:
Tiny
Small
Normal
Large
Huge
Close Tags
[quote="jebba"][quote="Saint of Killers"]I never did comprehend how so much non-free stuff appeared to be in the kernel. I was of the understanding that such stuff was not allowed near the kernel in the 1st place. If stuff needs to be added, and people choose to do so, fine, but why the kernel? It should be able to be loaded into user-space, or other areas surely?[/quote] I didn't realize it for a long time either (like a decade). dmwm2 is actually working on trying to get the firmware out of the kernel and use a firmwareloader() mechanism that all firmware passing thru the kernel would use. This would make it easier to do a free kernel (well, despite what lxoliva says!), but the rationale is that *it would make it easier for companies to distribute firmware*. So basically it (might) make building a free kernel/distro easier, but it is also a means to encourage more firmware! doh. Hans de Goede is trying to argue that firmware is hardware on fedora-devel. heh. -Jeff[/quote]
Options
HTML is
ON
BBCode
is
ON
Smilies are
OFF
Disable HTML in this post
Disable BBCode in this post
All times are GMT
Jump to:
Select a forum
BLAG
----------------
announcements
support
open discussion
development
politics
non-free
Topic review
Author
Message
patrickm
Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2011 10:44 am
Post subject:
john maclean wrote:
Depends on what you want to do or achieve.
CentOS
- Based on Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)
- Long term support
- Very stable
- Very conservative
Fedora
- Testing ground for RHEL
- Active/rapid development cycle. I.e Cutting edge
If you want to use CentOS because of the long term support and stability, you could consider using
Scientific Linux
. SL is created from the same sources as CentOS but a little less strict on being 100% binary identical to RHEL. The people who created it (working with Fermilab and CERN) are surprisingly friendly ;-)
sagitter
Posted: Fri Oct 14, 2011 6:28 pm
Post subject:
Quote:
Wow. There's a huge thread in fedora-devel started by Alexandre Oliva about linux-libre and such. I've written a few messages in there. I usually try to stay out of that crap, but I fell in this time.
Fedora's website says shit like:
knowing liars wrote:
We try to always do the right thing, and provide only free and open source software.
when they *KNOW* they distribute plenty of non-free software and even have a special interest group dedicated to it!
Anyway, I also learned that their "logic" for distributing firmware is they say it's "content" not "software". Ya, it's just code put through a compiler spit out into a binary and distributed--clearly "not software".
Massive flamewar begins here:
...l
-Jeff
Hello to everyone.
This is the reason because i've just decided to move my attention to Blag Linux (other than Fedora).
I love free software but today the Linux Kernel without no-open-firmware use is complicated.
col54red
Posted: Mon May 02, 2011 6:05 pm
Post subject:
john maclean wrote:
Depends on what you want to do or achieve.
CentOS
- Based on Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)
- Long term support
- Very stable
- Very conservative
Fedora
- Testing ground for RHEL
- Active/rapid development cycle. I.e Cutting edge
thanks for your explanation john.
john maclean
Posted: Tue May 19, 2009 8:05 pm
Post subject:
Depends on what you want to do or achieve.
CentOS
- Based on Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)
- Long term support
- Very stable
- Very conservative
Fedora
- Testing ground for RHEL
- Active/rapid development cycle. I.e Cutting edge
caramel1982
Posted: Tue May 19, 2009 5:39 am
Post subject:
which is better? fedora or centOS?
noldrin
Posted: Fri Nov 07, 2008 1:43 pm
Post subject:
actually the term I was looking for was confirmation bias
uninverted
Posted: Fri Nov 07, 2008 2:54 am
Post subject:
noldrin wrote:
I forgot the exact word to describe it, but when you have put a lot of stock in one view point and someone shows the obvious fallacy in it, people will do all sorts of absurd rationalizations in order to try and argue an emotional viewpoint.
Religion?
noldrin
Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2008 9:04 pm
Post subject:
I forgot the exact word to describe it, but when you have put a lot of stock in one view point and someone shows the obvious fallacy in it, people will do all sorts of absurd rationalizations in order to try and argue an emotional viewpoint.
Saint of Killers
Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2008 6:31 pm
Post subject:
"Firmware is hardware"? What kind of retards does he think everyone else is? It's nothing of the kind. It may be a different layer, but it still exists as software.
I've never claimed to be the smartest person on the planet, but some of the arguements I was reading from your link just make me wonder as to the actual intelligence of the folk working on this stuff. They're either willfully ignorant, or dumb as bat-shit when it comes to this stuff. I had to keep checking I wasn't on some satire site. Madness.
noldrin
Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2008 1:20 pm
Post subject:
People like to ignore problems. But if you shine enough light on them, then often times they will fix them
jebba
Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2008 11:07 am
Post subject:
Saint of Killers wrote:
I never did comprehend how so much non-free stuff appeared to be in the kernel. I was of the understanding that such stuff was not allowed near the kernel in the 1st place. If stuff needs to be added, and people choose to do so, fine, but why the kernel? It should be able to be loaded into user-space, or other areas surely?
I didn't realize it for a long time either (like a decade).
dmwm2 is actually working on trying to get the firmware out of the kernel and use a firmwareloader() mechanism that all firmware passing thru the kernel would use. This would make it easier to do a free kernel (well, despite what lxoliva says!), but the rationale is that *it would make it easier for companies to distribute firmware*. So basically it (might) make building a free kernel/distro easier, but it is also a means to encourage more firmware! doh.
Hans de Goede is trying to argue that firmware is hardware on fedora-devel. heh.
-Jeff
Saint of Killers
Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2008 10:55 am
Post subject:
I never did comprehend how so much non-free stuff appeared to be in the kernel. I was of the understanding that such stuff was not allowed near the kernel in the 1st place. If stuff needs to be added, and people choose to do so, fine, but why the kernel? It should be able to be loaded into user-space, or other areas surely?
jebba
Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2008 9:07 am
Post subject: Fedora
Wow. There's a huge thread in fedora-devel started by Alexandre Oliva about linux-libre and such. I've written a few messages in there. I usually try to stay out of that crap, but I fell in this time.
Fedora's website says shit like:
knowing liars wrote:
We try to always do the right thing, and provide only free and open source software.
when they *KNOW* they distribute plenty of non-free software and even have a special interest group dedicated to it!
Anyway, I also learned that their "logic" for distributing firmware is they say it's "content" not "software". Ya, it's just code put through a compiler spit out into a binary and distributed--clearly "not software".
Massive flamewar begins here:
http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-June/msg00411.html
-Jeff
Protected by
Anti-Spam ACP