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
hi,
License is very restrictive.
Please remove them from the distribution.
--cut--
TERMS AND CONDITIONS
IMPORTANT - PLEASE READ BEFORE INSTALLING OR USING THIS INTEL(C) SOFTWARE
Do not use or load this firmware (the "Software") until you have carefully read
the following terms and conditio
11 matches
Mail list logo
