bug-hurd
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: July 2010: RMS about the Hurd


From: Michal Suchanek
Subject: Re: July 2010: RMS about the Hurd
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2010 11:43:27 +0200

On 3 August 2010 05:14, Quiliro Ordóñez <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>> | Finishing the HURD would not advance us at all in supporting these
>> |   devices. The work that is needed is at the driver and firmware level.
>> |   That's why our high priority task list includes items relating to
>> |   free drivers, but not the HURD.
>> |
>
> Do you think that having a good Hurd would remove or at least lessen the
> problem of the non-libre firmware?

Having a microkernel and a modular system around it with well-defined
stable interfaces would make using non-free modules in the system
easier but would not make the modules free.

The primary venue for solving the issue with non-free drivers and
hardware is social and political at this point.

Some progress is being made in this area which is then often undone
(or obsoleted) by new hardware and new hardware manufacturer
decisions.

The option to reverse-engineer non-free drivers is a workaround but
did not provide a long term solid solution so far.

Thanks

Michal



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]