Fedora not "free" enough for GNU?

[Alexandre Oliva]

On Sep 22, 2008, Adam Jackson <ajax at redhat.com> wrote:

> Partly because statements like "But they don't, and I can't quite
> understand why" makes you sound like you have a phenomenal persecution
> complex, which triggers the crazy-person filter.

The reason I've focused on whatever effect I might have on the
rejection of the message is that this possibility was brought up.
It's not something I made up myself and, although I don't reject the
possibility that it plays a significant role, I'm looking for other
possibilities as well.  I suspect this one is just as significant:

> a problem that is not universally agreed to be a problem at all.

in spite of Fedora's stated goals.

> (Please don't take this as an invitation to try to convince me.)

:-)

> But, now for a real technical objection:

> atropine:~% uname -a
> Linux atropine 2.6.27-0.314.rc5.git9.fc10.i686 #1 SMP Sun Sep 7 20:57:41
> EDT 2008 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux
> atropine:~% modinfo -F firmware aic7xxx | wc -l
> 0

Erhm...  Are you sure aic7xxx was built with any expectation of
loading firmware through the standard firmware-loading interface,
rather than of having it built right into the kernel image?

$ uname -r
2.6.27-libre.0.337.rc6.git5.fc10.x86_64
$ modinfo -F firmware snd-maestro3
ess/maestro3_assp_minisrc.fw
ess/maestro3_assp_kernel.fw

-- 
Alexandre Oliva         http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Free Software Evangelist  oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
FSFLA Board Member       ¡Sé Libre! => http://www.fsfla.org/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer   aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}