On Mon, May 03, 2004 at 04:13:58PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: > "Francesco P. Lovergine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Firmware is a component of hardware. Also processors uses microcode to > > work. So, do we are wrong in calling that 'hardware'? > > Real firmware is as you say. But "loaded on demand" is not a > component of hardware any longer. > > > Again, the separation among hardware and software is damn tiny in modern > > electronic. > > For free software purposes, the test is easy: If I wanted to change > this, could I? If I wanted to distribute my modifications, can I? > > Is what restricts me from doing these things only my lack of source > and licensing permission?
I'm just saying that by a practical point of view who thinks so is pretending that hardware is free too. Your point of view is that firmware is software. Ok, that's also true for all the hardware you are using. I'm not so sure that any GPL program can be used along with a program (hardware) that is not available in its preferred form of modification, not freely distributable, and so on. I see no difference between microcode loaded on CPU (just as an example) and that loaded by the kernel to have hardware working. Really no difference. And what are you saying only renforce this ill interpretation. -- Francesco P. Lovergine
