GNU Linux-libre's Freed-ora Effort To "Free Fedora" Has Been Sunset

[phoronix]

Phoronix: GNU Linux-libre's Freed-ora Effort To "Free Fedora" Has Been Sunset

Freed-ora had been a seldom talked about effort from the Free Software Foundation Latin America maintainers of GNU Linux-libre to ensure a fully free software kernel was installed on interested Fedora Linux systems and that no non-free packages were installed on the system. But now that effort has come to an end...

https://www.phoronix.com/news/Freed-ora-No-More

[Barley9432]

The email is saddening. What he is saying is 100% correct, there are binary blobs disguised as source code, yet whenever he tries to mention it on Wikipedia or in the Fedora bug tracker he gets censored. Disgraceful.

[kbios]

I feel like all the effort spent in preventing users from "accidentally" installing non-free software would be better spent ensuring that no such software is necessary in the first place (eg reverse engineering firmware)

[leoheck]

WHAT? I think I am having a stroke.

[QwertyChouskie]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Linux_kernel

The entire basis of trying to label the kernel as "non-free" is hinging on firmware for an old AppleTalk device. Why not just nuke this driver for a long-deprecated networking protocol that is probably broken anyways due to a lack of attention, and make everyone happy? All the other blobs were long-since moved the the linux-firmware repository.

Also, including a piece of non-free firmware (EDIT: arguably, at least it seems most kernel devs share this view) does not make the kernel itself non-free. Wikipedia already covers the blob issue in a sensible way: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_...e_binary_blobs

[skeevy420]

Also, including a piece of non-free firmware does not make the kernel itself non-free.

Hmm, well...

[zexelon]

Yeah... real life is much harder than the fantasy of thinking companies will care about your zealotry for a definition of freedom and users are happy to have non-working hardware functioning as expensive glorified paper weights!

[zexelon]

But, if the kernel is a microkernel, or a microkernel hybrid, then the kernel can be free and simultaneously the drivers can be fully closed-source.

So, the issue you are mentioning can be solved by appropriate kernel design. There is no real issue here, except for the opinions of one named Linus Thorvalds.

Yup, pretty much 100% agree with this. Sadly this is not what Linux is, honestly the NT kernel is a better design from this perspective. Looking forward to seeing if Redox OS can get off the ground.

[AlanTuring69]

Seems like an impractical project, not super surprising to see it disappear.

[Developer12]

If that "piece" is not free, then the kernel (with the piece included) is not free. It's as simple as that. It's just logic. I don't understand why would a single exception to that rule be allowed.

I think you're tossing around non-free a lot without any actual definition.