Hi,
do we have in Alpine intel ipw2100 firmware?
I tried installing firmware-intel and then all linux-firmware even, yet
I still get the error about missing firmware for my card.!
Riccardo
Hi Riccardo,
I had this problem for a time (in 2020). I was able to locate the
firmware via Debian and Upstream's websites. Then I copied the firmware
into my Alpine installation. When I last looked Alpine didn't offer
this firmware in any package, so I think this might be the fastest way
to get it done without writing an APKBUILD.
Some helpful links:
https://sourceforge.net/projects/ipw2100/files/ipw2100/https://ipw2100.sourceforge.net/firmware.phphttps://packages.debian.org/bullseye/firmware-ipw2x00https://wiki.debian.org/ipw2200
Regards,
Winston
https://winny.tech/
On 10/13/22 16:30, Riccardo Mottola wrote:
> Hi,>> do we have in Alpine intel ipw2100 firmware?> I tried installing firmware-intel and then all linux-firmware even, > yet I still get the error about missing firmware for my card.!>> Riccardo
Hi Winston,
I was unable to download the firmware directly from sourceforge.net, my
browser(s) continue to fail the accept test!
However, I did as you suggested: got the Debian package, "ar x" and then
tar the data file... put the firmware in /lib/firmware... and yes, my
ThinkPad connects to the wireless, the WiFi LED lights up.
I wonder why Alpine cannot have such a package? I have seen other
non-free firmware (how much I hate that... a reason why I skipped all
those "libre" distributions: without binary blobs a laptop is almost
useless nowadays).
May I ask an addition?
Riccardo
Winston Weinert wrote:
> Hi Riccardo,>> I had this problem for a time (in 2020). I was able to locate the> firmware via Debian and Upstream's websites. Then I copied the> firmware into my Alpine installation. When I last looked Alpine> didn't offer this firmware in any package, so I think this might be> the fastest way to get it done without writing an APKBUILD.>>> Some helpful links:>> https://sourceforge.net/projects/ipw2100/files/ipw2100/>> https://ipw2100.sourceforge.net/firmware.php>> https://packages.debian.org/bullseye/firmware-ipw2x00>> https://wiki.debian.org/ipw2200>>> Regards,>> Winston>> https://winny.tech/>
On Mon Oct 17, 2022 at 9:07 PM CEST, Riccardo Mottola wrote:
> Hi Winston,>> I was unable to download the firmware directly from sourceforge.net, my> browser(s) continue to fail the accept test!> However, I did as you suggested: got the Debian package, "ar x" and then> tar the data file... put the firmware in /lib/firmware... and yes, my> ThinkPad connects to the wireless, the WiFi LED lights up.>> I wonder why Alpine cannot have such a package? I have seen other> non-free firmware (how much I hate that... a reason why I skipped all> those "libre" distributions: without binary blobs a laptop is almost> useless nowadays).
alpine doesn't ship anything non-free, with really the only exception
being firmware under the "linux-firmware" project umbrella (and anything
overlooked, of course). that project (afaik) has the vendors adding
firmware to it by petitioning it directly, and it's more or less a
community consensus that it gets a pass since otherwise nothing is
really usable at all. that part is the distinction from "libre" distros
that ship nothing and let you use them on like 5 laptops (maybe a bit
harsh, but you know what i mean).
but as for everything else, it is all free software. no shortcuts there.
as for the ipw2x00 firmware, the licence isn't really much different than a
lot of things in linux-firmware:
ipw2100 firmware license 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 products is not licensed hereunder. Subject to the
terms of this Agreement, Intel grants to you a nonexclusive,
nontransferable, worldwide, fully paid-up license under Intel's
copyrights to: (i) copy the Software internally for your own development
and maintenance purposes; (ii) copy and distribute the Software to your
end-users, but only under a license agreement with terms at least as
restrictive as those contained in Intel's Final, Single User License
Agreement, attached as Exhibit A; and (iii) modify, copy and distribute
the end-user documentation which may accompany the Software, but only in
association with the Software.
but it's still nonfree. i guess adding it to the repositories would
require the same exemption linux-firmware does.
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/firmware/linux-firmware.git/
(read the various LICENSE.* files in there)
>> May I ask an addition?>> Riccardo>> Winston Weinert wrote:> > Hi Riccardo,> >> > I had this problem for a time (in 2020). I was able to locate the> > firmware via Debian and Upstream's websites. Then I copied the> > firmware into my Alpine installation. When I last looked Alpine> > didn't offer this firmware in any package, so I think this might be> > the fastest way to get it done without writing an APKBUILD.> >> >> > Some helpful links:> >> > https://sourceforge.net/projects/ipw2100/files/ipw2100/> >> > https://ipw2100.sourceforge.net/firmware.php> >> > https://packages.debian.org/bullseye/firmware-ipw2x00> >> > https://wiki.debian.org/ipw2200> >> >> > Regards,> >> > Winston> >> > https://winny.tech/> >
Hi,
On Mon, 17 Oct 2022, alice wrote:
> On Mon Oct 17, 2022 at 9:07 PM CEST, Riccardo Mottola wrote:>> Hi Winston,>>>> I was unable to download the firmware directly from sourceforge.net, my>> browser(s) continue to fail the accept test!>> However, I did as you suggested: got the Debian package, "ar x" and then>> tar the data file... put the firmware in /lib/firmware... and yes, my>> ThinkPad connects to the wireless, the WiFi LED lights up.>>>> I wonder why Alpine cannot have such a package? I have seen other>> non-free firmware (how much I hate that... a reason why I skipped all>> those "libre" distributions: without binary blobs a laptop is almost>> useless nowadays).> alpine doesn't ship anything non-free, with really the only exception> being firmware under the "linux-firmware" project umbrella (and anything> overlooked, of course). that project (afaik) has the vendors adding> firmware to it by petitioning it directly, and it's more or less a> community consensus that it gets a pass since otherwise nothing is> really usable at all. that part is the distinction from "libre" distros> that ship nothing and let you use them on like 5 laptops (maybe a bit> harsh, but you know what i mean).>> but as for everything else, it is all free software. no shortcuts there.>> as for the ipw2x00 firmware, the licence isn't really much different than a> lot of things in linux-firmware:>> ipw2100 firmware license 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 products is not licensed hereunder. Subject to the> terms of this Agreement, Intel grants to you a nonexclusive,> nontransferable, worldwide, fully paid-up license under Intel's> copyrights to: (i) copy the Software internally for your own development> and maintenance purposes; (ii) copy and distribute the Software to your> end-users, but only under a license agreement with terms at least as> restrictive as those contained in Intel's Final, Single User License> Agreement, attached as Exhibit A; and (iii) modify, copy and distribute> the end-user documentation which may accompany the Software, but only in> association with the Software.>> but it's still nonfree. i guess adding it to the repositories would> require the same exemption linux-firmware does.>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/firmware/linux-firmware.git/> (read the various LICENSE.* files in there)
I think it would be better if Intel just submitted it to linux-firmware
instead.
Ariadne
Hi Alice,
alice wrote:
> but as for everything else, it is all free software. no shortcuts there.>> as for the ipw2x00 firmware, the licence isn't really much different than a> lot of things in linux-firmware:
that's what I thought... almost all the same "crap", although I am not
expert in these license details.
Or maybe a "non-free" package?
Riccardo
On Mon Oct 17, 2022 at 9:37 PM CEST, Riccardo Mottola wrote:
> Hi Alice,>> alice wrote:> > but as for everything else, it is all free software. no shortcuts there.> >> > as for the ipw2x00 firmware, the licence isn't really much different than a> > lot of things in linux-firmware:>> that's what I thought... almost all the same "crap", although I am not> expert in these license details.>> Or maybe a "non-free" package?
we used to have a non-free repository (that wasn't built, and people had
to build the packages themselves, but it had the convenience of being
easy once you set that up). but that was dropped too, so linux-firmware
is really the only exemption now. i don't think there'll be any
exceptions for that.
there is however, nothing stopping other people from hosting
repositories- something like firmware has basically no dependencies, so
it would never even run into issues as an external package via an
external someone-else-hosted repository in /etc/apk/repositories.
i do have one myself, though funnily most of the things there are also
free anyway.
>> Riccardo
On Mon Oct 17, 2022 at 9:28 PM CEST, Ariadne Conill wrote:
> Hi,>> On Mon, 17 Oct 2022, alice wrote:>> > On Mon Oct 17, 2022 at 9:07 PM CEST, Riccardo Mottola wrote:> >> Hi Winston,> >>> >> I was unable to download the firmware directly from sourceforge.net, my> >> browser(s) continue to fail the accept test!> >> However, I did as you suggested: got the Debian package, "ar x" and then> >> tar the data file... put the firmware in /lib/firmware... and yes, my> >> ThinkPad connects to the wireless, the WiFi LED lights up.> >>> >> I wonder why Alpine cannot have such a package? I have seen other> >> non-free firmware (how much I hate that... a reason why I skipped all> >> those "libre" distributions: without binary blobs a laptop is almost> >> useless nowadays).> > alpine doesn't ship anything non-free, with really the only exception> > being firmware under the "linux-firmware" project umbrella (and anything> > overlooked, of course). that project (afaik) has the vendors adding> > firmware to it by petitioning it directly, and it's more or less a> > community consensus that it gets a pass since otherwise nothing is> > really usable at all. that part is the distinction from "libre" distros> > that ship nothing and let you use them on like 5 laptops (maybe a bit> > harsh, but you know what i mean).> >> > but as for everything else, it is all free software. no shortcuts there.> >> > as for the ipw2x00 firmware, the licence isn't really much different than a> > lot of things in linux-firmware:> >> > ipw2100 firmware license 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 products is not licensed hereunder. Subject to the> > terms of this Agreement, Intel grants to you a nonexclusive,> > nontransferable, worldwide, fully paid-up license under Intel's> > copyrights to: (i) copy the Software internally for your own development> > and maintenance purposes; (ii) copy and distribute the Software to your> > end-users, but only under a license agreement with terms at least as> > restrictive as those contained in Intel's Final, Single User License> > Agreement, attached as Exhibit A; and (iii) modify, copy and distribute> > the end-user documentation which may accompany the Software, but only in> > association with the Software.> >> > but it's still nonfree. i guess adding it to the repositories would> > require the same exemption linux-firmware does.> >> > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/firmware/linux-firmware.git/> > (read the various LICENSE.* files in there)>> I think it would be better if Intel just submitted it to linux-firmware > instead.
"just" is certainly doing a lot of heavy lifting there. i wouldn't mind
perhaps sending an email somewhere, but i don't really know where to
even start aside from generic-corporate-support-address or
very-specific-personal-email-to-intel-linux-engineer-via-lkml (bad). i
doubt they'd do it anyway, but it's worth a try if there's a non-generic
point of contact you can point me to.
>> Ariadne
Hi,
On Mon, 17 Oct 2022, alice wrote:
> On Mon Oct 17, 2022 at 9:28 PM CEST, Ariadne Conill wrote:>> Hi,>>>> On Mon, 17 Oct 2022, alice wrote:>>>>> On Mon Oct 17, 2022 at 9:07 PM CEST, Riccardo Mottola wrote:>>>> Hi Winston,>>>>>>>> I was unable to download the firmware directly from sourceforge.net, my>>>> browser(s) continue to fail the accept test!>>>> However, I did as you suggested: got the Debian package, "ar x" and then>>>> tar the data file... put the firmware in /lib/firmware... and yes, my>>>> ThinkPad connects to the wireless, the WiFi LED lights up.>>>>>>>> I wonder why Alpine cannot have such a package? I have seen other>>>> non-free firmware (how much I hate that... a reason why I skipped all>>>> those "libre" distributions: without binary blobs a laptop is almost>>>> useless nowadays).>>> alpine doesn't ship anything non-free, with really the only exception>>> being firmware under the "linux-firmware" project umbrella (and anything>>> overlooked, of course). that project (afaik) has the vendors adding>>> firmware to it by petitioning it directly, and it's more or less a>>> community consensus that it gets a pass since otherwise nothing is>>> really usable at all. that part is the distinction from "libre" distros>>> that ship nothing and let you use them on like 5 laptops (maybe a bit>>> harsh, but you know what i mean).>>>>>> but as for everything else, it is all free software. no shortcuts there.>>>>>> as for the ipw2x00 firmware, the licence isn't really much different than a>>> lot of things in linux-firmware:>>>>>> ipw2100 firmware license 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 products is not licensed hereunder. Subject to the>>> terms of this Agreement, Intel grants to you a nonexclusive,>>> nontransferable, worldwide, fully paid-up license under Intel's>>> copyrights to: (i) copy the Software internally for your own development>>> and maintenance purposes; (ii) copy and distribute the Software to your>>> end-users, but only under a license agreement with terms at least as>>> restrictive as those contained in Intel's Final, Single User License>>> Agreement, attached as Exhibit A; and (iii) modify, copy and distribute>>> the end-user documentation which may accompany the Software, but only in>>> association with the Software.>>>>>> but it's still nonfree. i guess adding it to the repositories would>>> require the same exemption linux-firmware does.>>>>>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/firmware/linux-firmware.git/>>> (read the various LICENSE.* files in there)>>>> I think it would be better if Intel just submitted it to linux-firmware>> instead.> "just" is certainly doing a lot of heavy lifting there. i wouldn't mind> perhaps sending an email somewhere, but i don't really know where to> even start aside from generic-corporate-support-address or> very-specific-personal-email-to-intel-linux-engineer-via-lkml (bad). i> doubt they'd do it anyway, but it's worth a try if there's a non-generic> point of contact you can point me to.
I will see what I can dig up through various channels. I think that it
should not be a problem to get Intel to submit their firmware through that
channel.
An alternative is that we include it in linux-firmware ourselves, but I
don't necessarily like the idea of opening that pandora's box.
Ariadne
On Mon Oct 17, 2022 at 10:20 PM CEST, Ariadne Conill wrote:
> Hi,>> On Mon, 17 Oct 2022, alice wrote:>> > On Mon Oct 17, 2022 at 9:28 PM CEST, Ariadne Conill wrote:> >> Hi,> >>> >> On Mon, 17 Oct 2022, alice wrote:> >>> >>> On Mon Oct 17, 2022 at 9:07 PM CEST, Riccardo Mottola wrote:> >>>> Hi Winston,> >>>>> >>>> I was unable to download the firmware directly from sourceforge.net, my> >>>> browser(s) continue to fail the accept test!> >>>> However, I did as you suggested: got the Debian package, "ar x" and then> >>>> tar the data file... put the firmware in /lib/firmware... and yes, my> >>>> ThinkPad connects to the wireless, the WiFi LED lights up.> >>>>> >>>> I wonder why Alpine cannot have such a package? I have seen other> >>>> non-free firmware (how much I hate that... a reason why I skipped all> >>>> those "libre" distributions: without binary blobs a laptop is almost> >>>> useless nowadays).> >>> alpine doesn't ship anything non-free, with really the only exception> >>> being firmware under the "linux-firmware" project umbrella (and anything> >>> overlooked, of course). that project (afaik) has the vendors adding> >>> firmware to it by petitioning it directly, and it's more or less a> >>> community consensus that it gets a pass since otherwise nothing is> >>> really usable at all. that part is the distinction from "libre" distros> >>> that ship nothing and let you use them on like 5 laptops (maybe a bit> >>> harsh, but you know what i mean).> >>>> >>> but as for everything else, it is all free software. no shortcuts there.> >>>> >>> as for the ipw2x00 firmware, the licence isn't really much different than a> >>> lot of things in linux-firmware:> >>>> >>> ipw2100 firmware license 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 products is not licensed hereunder. Subject to the> >>> terms of this Agreement, Intel grants to you a nonexclusive,> >>> nontransferable, worldwide, fully paid-up license under Intel's> >>> copyrights to: (i) copy the Software internally for your own development> >>> and maintenance purposes; (ii) copy and distribute the Software to your> >>> end-users, but only under a license agreement with terms at least as> >>> restrictive as those contained in Intel's Final, Single User License> >>> Agreement, attached as Exhibit A; and (iii) modify, copy and distribute> >>> the end-user documentation which may accompany the Software, but only in> >>> association with the Software.> >>>> >>> but it's still nonfree. i guess adding it to the repositories would> >>> require the same exemption linux-firmware does.> >>>> >>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/firmware/linux-firmware.git/> >>> (read the various LICENSE.* files in there)> >>> >> I think it would be better if Intel just submitted it to linux-firmware> >> instead.> > "just" is certainly doing a lot of heavy lifting there. i wouldn't mind> > perhaps sending an email somewhere, but i don't really know where to> > even start aside from generic-corporate-support-address or> > very-specific-personal-email-to-intel-linux-engineer-via-lkml (bad). i> > doubt they'd do it anyway, but it's worth a try if there's a non-generic> > point of contact you can point me to.>> I will see what I can dig up through various channels. I think that it > should not be a problem to get Intel to submit their firmware through that > channel.
sounds good. hopefully they do :)
> An alternative is that we include it in linux-firmware ourselves, but I > don't necessarily like the idea of opening that pandora's box.
yeah, me neither. though it's an opened one, i think, as it's what
debian does. maybe they were lax here, or maybe they researched it a
bunch somewhere i haven't looked for:
https://packages.debian.org/bullseye/firmware-ipw2x00
the .orig is the original firmware, and the .debian addition (verified
via the source packages) contains a few custom extras, this package
being one of them.
>> Ariadne
Hi,
On Mon, 17 Oct 2022, alice wrote:
> On Mon Oct 17, 2022 at 10:20 PM CEST, Ariadne Conill wrote:>> Hi,>>>> On Mon, 17 Oct 2022, alice wrote:>>>>> On Mon Oct 17, 2022 at 9:28 PM CEST, Ariadne Conill wrote:>>>> Hi,>>>>>>>> On Mon, 17 Oct 2022, alice wrote:>>>>>>>>> On Mon Oct 17, 2022 at 9:07 PM CEST, Riccardo Mottola wrote:>>>>>> Hi Winston,>>>>>>>>>>>> I was unable to download the firmware directly from sourceforge.net, my>>>>>> browser(s) continue to fail the accept test!>>>>>> However, I did as you suggested: got the Debian package, "ar x" and then>>>>>> tar the data file... put the firmware in /lib/firmware... and yes, my>>>>>> ThinkPad connects to the wireless, the WiFi LED lights up.>>>>>>>>>>>> I wonder why Alpine cannot have such a package? I have seen other>>>>>> non-free firmware (how much I hate that... a reason why I skipped all>>>>>> those "libre" distributions: without binary blobs a laptop is almost>>>>>> useless nowadays).>>>>> alpine doesn't ship anything non-free, with really the only exception>>>>> being firmware under the "linux-firmware" project umbrella (and anything>>>>> overlooked, of course). that project (afaik) has the vendors adding>>>>> firmware to it by petitioning it directly, and it's more or less a>>>>> community consensus that it gets a pass since otherwise nothing is>>>>> really usable at all. that part is the distinction from "libre" distros>>>>> that ship nothing and let you use them on like 5 laptops (maybe a bit>>>>> harsh, but you know what i mean).>>>>>>>>>> but as for everything else, it is all free software. no shortcuts there.>>>>>>>>>> as for the ipw2x00 firmware, the licence isn't really much different than a>>>>> lot of things in linux-firmware:>>>>>>>>>> ipw2100 firmware license 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 products is not licensed hereunder. Subject to the>>>>> terms of this Agreement, Intel grants to you a nonexclusive,>>>>> nontransferable, worldwide, fully paid-up license under Intel's>>>>> copyrights to: (i) copy the Software internally for your own development>>>>> and maintenance purposes; (ii) copy and distribute the Software to your>>>>> end-users, but only under a license agreement with terms at least as>>>>> restrictive as those contained in Intel's Final, Single User License>>>>> Agreement, attached as Exhibit A; and (iii) modify, copy and distribute>>>>> the end-user documentation which may accompany the Software, but only in>>>>> association with the Software.>>>>>>>>>> but it's still nonfree. i guess adding it to the repositories would>>>>> require the same exemption linux-firmware does.>>>>>>>>>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/firmware/linux-firmware.git/>>>>> (read the various LICENSE.* files in there)>>>>>>>> I think it would be better if Intel just submitted it to linux-firmware>>>> instead.>>> "just" is certainly doing a lot of heavy lifting there. i wouldn't mind>>> perhaps sending an email somewhere, but i don't really know where to>>> even start aside from generic-corporate-support-address or>>> very-specific-personal-email-to-intel-linux-engineer-via-lkml (bad). i>>> doubt they'd do it anyway, but it's worth a try if there's a non-generic>>> point of contact you can point me to.>>>> I will see what I can dig up through various channels. I think that it>> should not be a problem to get Intel to submit their firmware through that>> channel.> sounds good. hopefully they do :)>>> An alternative is that we include it in linux-firmware ourselves, but I>> don't necessarily like the idea of opening that pandora's box.> yeah, me neither. though it's an opened one, i think, as it's what> debian does. maybe they were lax here, or maybe they researched it a> bunch somewhere i haven't looked for:> https://packages.debian.org/bullseye/firmware-ipw2x00>> the .orig is the original firmware, and the .debian addition (verified> via the source packages) contains a few custom extras, this package> being one of them.
Debian choosing to do it that way does not mean that we are also committed
to doing the same way, of course.
My concern about going that way is that we probably need to have strict
licensing requirements for any firmware we add there, otherwise everyone
will want firmware added there, even if we do not actually have permission
to redistribute it.
Ariadne
On Mon Oct 17, 2022 at 10:34 PM CEST, Ariadne Conill wrote:
> Hi,>> On Mon, 17 Oct 2022, alice wrote:>> > On Mon Oct 17, 2022 at 10:20 PM CEST, Ariadne Conill wrote:> >> Hi,> >>> >> On Mon, 17 Oct 2022, alice wrote:> >>> >>> On Mon Oct 17, 2022 at 9:28 PM CEST, Ariadne Conill wrote:> >>>> Hi,> >>>>> >>>> On Mon, 17 Oct 2022, alice wrote:> >>>>> >>>>> On Mon Oct 17, 2022 at 9:07 PM CEST, Riccardo Mottola wrote:> >>>>>> Hi Winston,> >>>>>>> >>>>>> I was unable to download the firmware directly from sourceforge.net, my> >>>>>> browser(s) continue to fail the accept test!> >>>>>> However, I did as you suggested: got the Debian package, "ar x" and then> >>>>>> tar the data file... put the firmware in /lib/firmware... and yes, my> >>>>>> ThinkPad connects to the wireless, the WiFi LED lights up.> >>>>>>> >>>>>> I wonder why Alpine cannot have such a package? I have seen other> >>>>>> non-free firmware (how much I hate that... a reason why I skipped all> >>>>>> those "libre" distributions: without binary blobs a laptop is almost> >>>>>> useless nowadays).> >>>>> alpine doesn't ship anything non-free, with really the only exception> >>>>> being firmware under the "linux-firmware" project umbrella (and anything> >>>>> overlooked, of course). that project (afaik) has the vendors adding> >>>>> firmware to it by petitioning it directly, and it's more or less a> >>>>> community consensus that it gets a pass since otherwise nothing is> >>>>> really usable at all. that part is the distinction from "libre" distros> >>>>> that ship nothing and let you use them on like 5 laptops (maybe a bit> >>>>> harsh, but you know what i mean).> >>>>>> >>>>> but as for everything else, it is all free software. no shortcuts there.> >>>>>> >>>>> as for the ipw2x00 firmware, the licence isn't really much different than a> >>>>> lot of things in linux-firmware:> >>>>>> >>>>> ipw2100 firmware license 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 products is not licensed hereunder. Subject to the> >>>>> terms of this Agreement, Intel grants to you a nonexclusive,> >>>>> nontransferable, worldwide, fully paid-up license under Intel's> >>>>> copyrights to: (i) copy the Software internally for your own development> >>>>> and maintenance purposes; (ii) copy and distribute the Software to your> >>>>> end-users, but only under a license agreement with terms at least as> >>>>> restrictive as those contained in Intel's Final, Single User License> >>>>> Agreement, attached as Exhibit A; and (iii) modify, copy and distribute> >>>>> the end-user documentation which may accompany the Software, but only in> >>>>> association with the Software.> >>>>>> >>>>> but it's still nonfree. i guess adding it to the repositories would> >>>>> require the same exemption linux-firmware does.> >>>>>> >>>>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/firmware/linux-firmware.git/> >>>>> (read the various LICENSE.* files in there)> >>>>> >>>> I think it would be better if Intel just submitted it to linux-firmware> >>>> instead.> >>> "just" is certainly doing a lot of heavy lifting there. i wouldn't mind> >>> perhaps sending an email somewhere, but i don't really know where to> >>> even start aside from generic-corporate-support-address or> >>> very-specific-personal-email-to-intel-linux-engineer-via-lkml (bad). i> >>> doubt they'd do it anyway, but it's worth a try if there's a non-generic> >>> point of contact you can point me to.> >>> >> I will see what I can dig up through various channels. I think that it> >> should not be a problem to get Intel to submit their firmware through that> >> channel.> > sounds good. hopefully they do :)> >> >> An alternative is that we include it in linux-firmware ourselves, but I> >> don't necessarily like the idea of opening that pandora's box.> > yeah, me neither. though it's an opened one, i think, as it's what> > debian does. maybe they were lax here, or maybe they researched it a> > bunch somewhere i haven't looked for:> > https://packages.debian.org/bullseye/firmware-ipw2x00> >> > the .orig is the original firmware, and the .debian addition (verified> > via the source packages) contains a few custom extras, this package> > being one of them.>> Debian choosing to do it that way does not mean that we are also committed > to doing the same way, of course.>> My concern about going that way is that we probably need to have strict > licensing requirements for any firmware we add there, otherwise everyone > will want firmware added there, even if we do not actually have permission > to redistribute it.
yeah, of course. the first thing i checked was the actual licence of the
thing in question. in that hypothetical future, everyone else would be
subject to the same checking.. which would mean someone would have to
specialise doing it. i don't think i'd even count, since i'm not a
lawyer (and i prefer to never read these things if i don't have to). a
pretty bad can of worms to open there..
>> Ariadne