headers
Xose Vazquez Perez | 8 Jul 2012 23:55
Picon

intel ipw2100/ipw2200 firmware must be removed

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 conditions. By loading or using the Software, you agree
to the terms of this Agreement. If you do not wish to so agree, do not install
or use the Software.

LICENSEES:

Please note:

* If you are an End-User, only Exhibit A, the SOFTWARE LICENSE AGREEMENT,
   applies.
* If you are an Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM), Independent Hardware
   Vendor (IHV), or Independent Software Vendor (ISV), this complete Agreement
   applies

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For OEMs, IHVs, and ISVs:

LICENSE. This Software is licensed for use only in conjunction with Intel
component products. Use of the Software in conjunction with non-Intel component
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply |
headers
mike cloaked | 9 Jul 2012 00:05
Picon

Re: intel ipw2100/ipw2200 firmware must be removed

On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 10:55 PM, Xose Vazquez Perez
<xose.vazquez <at> gmail.com> 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
--

-- 
devel mailing list
devel <at> lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Permalink | Reply |
headers
Kevin Fenzi | 9 Jul 2012 00:16
Gravatar

Re: intel ipw2100/ipw2200 firmware must be removed

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 failing to meet those requirements, please file a bug
or mail legal <at> fedoraproject.org explaining why you think it's not
meeting requirements and why it should be removed. 

Thanks, 

kevin

--

-- 
devel mailing list
devel <at> lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Permalink | Reply |
headers
Ralf Ertzinger | 10 Jul 2012 10:03
Picon

Re: intel ipw2100/ipw2200 firmware must be removed

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 CPU compatible with the
host CPU?
--

-- 
devel mailing list
devel <at> lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Permalink | Reply |
headers
Rahul Sundaram | 10 Jul 2012 14:22
Picon
Gravatar

Re: intel ipw2100/ipw2200 firmware must be removed

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 mean that
> Fedora cannot ship firmware for hardware that has a CPU compatible with the
> host CPU?

Do we have any such firmware at all?  Let's stick to practical issues.

Rahul
--

-- 
devel mailing list
devel <at> lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Permalink | Reply |
headers
Ralf Ertzinger | 10 Jul 2012 21:52
Picon

Re: intel ipw2100/ipw2200 firmware must be removed

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 man, and from man to pig, and from pig
to man again: but it was impossible to say which was which."
		-- George Orwell, "Animal Farm"
--

-- 
devel mailing list
devel <at> lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Permalink | Reply |
headers
Peter Jones | 14 Jul 2012 20:19
Picon
Favicon
Gravatar

Re: intel ipw2100/ipw2200 firmware must be removed

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 later.

Even in that case, merely being the same ISA is probably not sufficient to
violate that requirement - they'd have to, for example, have an ABI that
linux supports loading and jumping in to.

-- 
         Peter

--

-- 
devel mailing list
devel <at> lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Permalink | Reply |
headers
Eric Smith | 15 Jul 2012 01:25
Gravatar

Re: intel ipw2100/ipw2200 firmware must be removed

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 the host CPU? 

If it does mean that, it will be a problem for the ARM architecture, as 
many hardware devices using downloaded firmware use ARM cores.

The specific statement is:

     "The files are non-executable (note: this means that the files 
cannot run on their own, not that they are just chmod -x)"

I'm not sure what it means for files to "run on their own".  I don't 
think I have a single file on any of my computers that can run on its 
own.  As far as I can see, even the Linux kernel cannot run on its own.

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 conceivable that some might be in ELF format.

--

-- 
devel mailing list
devel <at> lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply |
headers
Al Dunsmuir | 15 Jul 2012 15:41
Picon
Favicon

Re: intel ipw2100/ipw2200 firmware must be removed

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 Fedora cannot ship firmware for 
>> hardware that has a CPU compatible with the host CPU? 

> If it does mean that, it will be a problem for the ARM architecture, as
> many hardware devices using downloaded firmware use ARM cores.

> The specific statement is:

>      "The files are non-executable (note: this means that the files 
> cannot run on their own, not that they are just chmod -x)"

> I'm not sure what it means for files to "run on their own".  I don't 
> think I have a single file on any of my computers that can run on its 
> own.  As far as I can see, even the Linux kernel cannot run on its own.

> 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 conceivable that some might be in ELF format.

This   topic   has   come   up   at   regular  intervals  in the past,
especially  when  the  kernel interfaces for downloading firmware were
being developed.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply |
headers
Toshio Kuratomi | 16 Jul 2012 17:16
Picon
Gravatar

Re: intel ipw2100/ipw2200 firmware must be removed

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 conceivable that some might be in ELF format.
> 
> This   topic   has   come   up   at   regular  intervals  in the past,
> especially  when  the  kernel interfaces for downloading firmware were
> being developed.
> 
> The packaging statement is meant to clarify, and to be read literally.
> It   means  that  the  program is not a stand-alone program for use by
> the  host  computer.  It requires additional hardware to operate.   It
> is  marked  non-executable  "-x" to prevent attempts to execute by the
> host  computer  (or  for  the security conscious, attempts to disguise
> malware as firmware).
> 
> Normally firmware is a binary blob that is downloaded by the kernel to
> that  hardware,  and  used in some manner by that hardware,  It may be
> a  program  (code/data)  executed  by  a CPU (or equivalent such as an
> ASIC)  or  some  form of data required for execution of that hardware.
> It may be multiple of each, in a fancy wrapper scheme with CRCs.
> 
> Delivering  firmware  via a standard kernel API was a big change a few
> years ago.  It allowed standard packaging of firmware, and eliminated
> the need for users to do nasty  things  like  use  programs the cut the
> firmware images out of Windows PE executables downloaded from chip/card
> vendor websites.
>
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply |
headers
Xose Vazquez Perez | 14 Jul 2012 10:31
Picon

Re: intel ipw2100/ipw2200 firmware must be removed

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.*
              ^^^^ ^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^  ^^^^^^^^^^    ^^^^^
Do not use or load this firmware image (the "Software") until you have carefully
read the following terms and conditions. By loading or using the Software, you
agree to the terms of this Agreement. If you do not wish to so agree, do not
install or use the Software.
[...]"

These firmwares are not included in linux-firmware.git for very
good reasons.
--

-- 
devel mailing list
devel <at> lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Permalink | Reply |

Gmane