Josh, thanks for filing this. It is as you say good to have it out there. My question is this: why should this firmware loader be any different than the kernel? It is required only under kernel 2.4, and performs the same function as the bcm203x module in kernel 2.6.
I can see no reason for not applying exactly the same practice as Debian does to the kernel. I am not a lawyer, nor do I have enough spare time to sink into argument about this. My guiding principle will be to follow what happens to the kernel here unless I am persuaded convincingly by my fellow developers or project policy otherwise. regards -- Edd
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
