Why is Fedora not a Free GNU/Linux distributions?

jeff moe moe at blagblagblag.org
Tue Jul 22 02:30:39 UTC 2008

Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler <at> chello.at> writes:

> Alexandre Oliva <aoliva <at> redhat.com> writes:
> > If you find any such problems in BLAG 80000 (never formally released)
> > or BLAG 90000 (released easier today), please report them.
> Here's some I found at a quick glance:
> http://www.blagblagblag.org/90000/BLAG/
> RPMS.fedora/zd1211-firmware-1.4-1.noarch.rpm
> Yes, it says it's GPLv2. Now try looking at the "source code"... See also the 
> Fedora review request (where I raised that point,
> wondering if this is legal to 
> redistribute at all):
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=221675#c17
> http://www.blagblagblag.org/90000/BLAG/
> RPMS.fedora/midisport-firmware-1.2-1.noarch.rpm
> Claims to be GPLv2, but only the firmware loader is GPLv2
> (actually dual GPLv2 
> or BSD). The package also contains firmware files (in /lib/firmware)
> under the following license:
> > The firmware files (*.ihx) are copyrighted by Midiman, and can be used
> > and redistributed only as part of this package.

Their %{LICENSE} tags read:
zd1211-firmware GPLv2
midisport-firmware GPLv2+

These have been removed from our 90000 and BLAGHEAD (rawhide) repositories.
Presumably Fedora would want to change the tag to "GPLv2 and redistributable" or
whatever the case may be.

Thanks for tracking them down. If you notice any others, please let us know.


More information about the fedora-list mailing list