Is Linux not free software itself? I thought propietary stuff was added downstream.

Am I getting something wrong?

  • Dagamant@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    58
    ·
    23 days ago

    The Linux-libre Wikipedia entry sums it up pretty well:

    “According to the Free Software Foundation Latin America, Linux-libre is a modified version of the Linux kernel that contains no binary blobs, obfuscated code, or code released under proprietary licenses.[7] In the Linux kernel, they are mostly used for proprietary firmware images. While generally redistributable, binary blobs do not give the user the freedom to audit, modify, or, consequently, redistribute their modified versions. The GNU Project keeps Linux-libre in synchronization with the mainline Linux kernel.[8]”

    Basically; some stuff in the kernel is either not free or not open but is included for convenience.

    • pastermil@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      23 days ago

      AFAIK, the Linux codebase is actually open source in its entirety. However it has parts that are capable of loading non-free stuff like firmware. The linux-libre project makes sure those parts are disabled.

      Personally, I think it’s a fool’s errand as it would render most modern systems unusable (in the reasonable sense).

      They also don’t apply such harsh judgement to firmware that resides in ROM, and only to firmware updates. In most of these cases you’d have systems with outdated firmwares with neither QoL nor security updates.