Binary blob: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 16:41, 2 December 2020

Revision as of 00:24, 23 December 2020

Line 39:

|website= Linux.org.ru

}}</ref><ref name=wpaul-rocks>{{cite conference

|author= [[Theo de Raadt]] |date= 2016-12-03

|author-link= Theo de Raadt

|date= 2016-12-03

|section-url= //www.openbsd.org/papers/opencon06-docs/mgp00011.html

|section= Page 11: The hardware: ethernet

Line 69 ⟶ 71:

[[File:Linux AMD graphics stack.svg|thumb|300px| The proprietary Linux graphic driver, {{Mono|[[AMD Catalyst|libGL-fglrx-glx]]}}, will share the same [[Direct Rendering Manager|DRM]] infrastructure with [[Mesa 3D]]. As there is no stable in-kernel [[Application binary interface|ABI]], AMD had to constantly adapt the former [[binary blob]] used by Catalyst.]]

In the [[Linux kernel]] development community, [[Linus Torvalds]] has made strong statements on the issue of binary-only modules, asserting: "I ''refuse'' to even consider tying my hands over some binary-only module", and continuing: "I want people to know that when they use binary-only modules, it's THEIR problem."<ref>{{cite web|url=https://lwn.net/1999/0211/a/lt-binary.html|title=a/lt-binary|work=lwn.net}}</ref> In 2008, 176 Linux kernel developers signed a ''Position Statement on Linux Kernel Modules'' that stated "We, the undersigned Linux kernel developers, consider any closed-source Linux kernel module or driver to be harmful and undesirable... We have repeatedly found them to be detrimental to Linux users, businesses, and the greater Linux ecosystem."<ref>{{cite web|url=https://lwn.net/Articles/287056/|title=A position statement on Linux Kernel Modules|date=June 2008|author=[[Greg Kroah-Hartman]]|author-link=Greg Kroah-Hartman|publisher=[[The Linux Foundation]]}}</ref> The Linux kernel maintainer [[Greg Kroah-Hartman]] has stated that it is illegal to redistribute closed source modules for the [[GNU General Public License|GNU General Public License-licensed]] Linux kernel.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.kroah.com/log/linux/ols_2006_keynote.html|author=[[Greg Kroah-Hartman]]|author-link=Greg Kroah-Hartman|publisher=[[Linux Symposium]]|title=Myths, Lies, and Truths about the Linux kernel|year=2006}}</ref>

However, the Linux kernel contains closed-source firmware required by various device drivers.{{r|gnu/free-sys-d-g--nonfree-fw|q1=Nonfree Firmware|gnu/common-d}} [[Alexandre Oliva]], the maintainer of [[Linux-libre]], a version of the Linux kernel that attempts to remove all binary blobs, including sourceless microcode, wrote in 2011: "Linux hasn't been Free Software since 1996, when Mr Torvalds accepted the first pieces of non-Free Software in the distributions of Linux he has published since 1991. Over these years, while this kernel grew by a factor of 14, the amount of non-Free firmware required by Linux drivers grew by an alarming factor of 83."<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.fsfla.org/ikiwiki/anuncio/2010-03-Linux-2.6.33-libre.en|title=::[FSFLA]:: Take your freedom back, with Linux-2.6.33-libre|work=fsfla.org}}</ref>

Line 117 ⟶ 119:

Circa 2005, this state of affairs prompted [[OpenBSD]] to create and popularise its [[bio(4)]], [[bioctl]] and [[sensor drive]] concepts as an alternative solution for [[RAID]] monitoring,<ref name=theo-misc-38>{{cite mailing list

|url= //marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=112630095818062

|author= [[Theo de Raadt]] |date= 2005-09-09

|author-link= Theo de Raadt

|date= 2005-09-09

|title= RAID management support coming in OpenBSD 3.8

|mailing-list= misc@ |publisher= [[OpenBSD]]