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

Bug#475490: marked as done ([firmware-ralink] Please switch to ISC licence)

Your message dated Fri, 11 Apr 2008 01:16:45 -0400
with message-id <200804110116.45854.chealer@gmail.com>
and subject line Close
has caused the Debian Bug report #475490,
regarding [firmware-ralink] Please switch to ISC licence
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
475490: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=475490
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: firmware-ralink
Version: 0.10
Severity: wishlist

It would be nice to have this package in main. It looks like this could be 
switched to the ISC licence as OpenBSD uses for distribution or ral and rum 
firmwares:
http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/~checkout~/src/sys/dev/microcode/

I only checked whether rt2661.bin and rt73.bin seemed to match, respectively, 
ral and rum's microcode.h-s. I don't know if there are several versions of 
the firmwares. If there are, my visual inspection was insufficient and we'd 
need to compile their microcode.h (AFAIK, Ralink doesn't distribute the 
firmwares directly for Linux under the ISC licence -  I must say this is 
strange if the firmware is the same). I could do that but I don't have any 
Ralink device requiring firmware to test the result. Of course, I could check 
if they're identical.

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
Ur...I guess there's no point in doing that if the source isn't available.

--- End Message ---
Reply to: