On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 09:41:26AM -0400, Al Dunsmuir wrote:
> On Saturday, July 14, 2012, 7:25:15 PM, Eric Smith wrote:
>
> > Perhaps it means that the file can't be in a supported executable format
> > such as ELF? Downloaded firmware often is in raw binary format, but
> > it's certainly conce
On Saturday, July 14, 2012, 7:25:15 PM, Eric Smith wrote:
> Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>> See:
>> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#Binary_Firmware
> Ralf Ertzinger wrote:
>> Question about that: The first requirement is that the file is
>> non-executable. Does that mean that Fe
Kevin Fenzi wrote:
See:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#Binary_Firmware
Ralf Ertzinger wrote:
Question about that: The first requirement is that the file is
non-executable. Does that mean that Fedora cannot ship firmware for
hardware that has a CPU compatible with
On 07/10/2012 03:52 PM, Ralf Ertzinger wrote:
Hi.
On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 17:52:28 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote
Do we have any such firmware at all? Let's stick to practical issues.
Wei don't, as far as I am aware. But with Intel actually preparing
to ship Xeon Phi hardware we might sooner than
On 07/09/2012 12:16 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
Has something changed with the license on them since they were reviewed
5 or so years ago?
I don't know, but this is _unacceptable_ :
"SOFTWARE LICENSE AGREEMENT (Final, Single User)
*IMPORTANT - READ BEFORE COPYING, INSTALLING OR USING.*
Hi.
On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 17:52:28 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote
> Do we have any such firmware at all? Let's stick to practical issues.
Wei don't, as far as I am aware. But with Intel actually preparing
to ship Xeon Phi hardware we might sooner than later.
--
"The creatures looked from pig to ma
On 07/10/2012 01:33 PM, Ralf Ertzinger wrote:
> Hi.
>
> On Sun, 8 Jul 2012 16:16:31 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
>> See:
>> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#Binary_Firmware
>
> Question about that:
>
> The first requirement is that the file is non-executable. Does that
Hi.
On Sun, 8 Jul 2012 16:16:31 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> See:
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#Binary_Firmware
Question about that:
The first requirement is that the file is non-executable. Does that mean that
Fedora cannot ship firmware for hardware that has a C
Has something changed with the license on them since they were reviewed
5 or so years ago?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=217351
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=217350
See:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#Binary_Firmware
If you think it's fail
On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 10:55 PM, Xose Vazquez Perez
wrote:
> hi,
>
> License is very restrictive.
> Please remove them from the distribution.
>
>
... and for those with that wireless hardware running Fedora what are
they supposed to use instead if there is no open source alternative?
--
mike c
10 matches
Mail list logo
