Ken Arromdee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Mon, 25 Oct 2004, Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote: >> >> > The person who has the device doesn't neceessarily have the firmware, >> >> > because >> >> > the firmware can be removed. >> >> The person doesn't have the device at that point -- only part of it. >> > The same reasoning applies for both examples if you refer to the >> > combination of >> > hardware plus CD as a "device". >> But that imagined device is broken: it needs another component to read >> the CD, load the firmware off of it into the computer's memory, >> process it there, then upload that to the device itself. > > Then by the same reasoning the all-hardware device is broken too. It needs > "another component" (driver) to function. Neither the version with the CD > nor the version with the eeprom will function by themselves.
OK, so there's a dependency on the driver. When Debian starts shipping hardware, I promise I'll make sure the hardware has a Depends line pointing at the driver. > Modifying software stored in an eeprom involves some sort of copying that > cutting a book in half doesn't, and therefore is prohibited under copyright > law. I can also scribble in a book, or apply voltages to this hardware device here. > There's no difference between the CD and the eeprom here. Then why is there a difference between a firmware-in-prom device and a firmware-in-fixed-circuit device? -Brian -- Brian Sniffen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
