libreboot
/
lbwww
1
0
Fork 0
Code Packages Projects Releases Activity

remove redundant paragraphs and reorganize the text

hslick-master
Leah Rowe 2022-01-03 01:22:49 +00:00
parent 7160bb5f0f
commit 3b9edf847f
1 changed files with 8 additions and 58 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

66
site/policy.md
View File

@ -149,29 +149,6 @@ indeed critical, but again, currently outside the scope of what lbmk does.
At the moment, lbmk concerns itself just with coreboot, but this ought to At the moment, lbmk concerns itself just with coreboot, but this ought to
change in the future. change in the future.
Examples of FSF inconsistency
=============================
Another example of FSF inconsistency: the ThinkPad T400 supported by Libreboot,
often comes with both an ATI *and* Intel graphics chipset, but coreboot can be
configured to use one or the other. If using the ATI chipset, there is currently
no free initialization code available, but you can disable it and use the Intel
one, where completely free initialization code exists in coreboot, plus free
drivers in linux. Under strict interpretation of the RYF guidelines, the T400
should not be endorsed by the FSF at all, but the FSF made an exception and
endorsed it *in configurations where the Intel chipset is used exclusively as
per software configuration*. They endorsed the T400 as sold by Leah Rowe, with
Libreboot pre-installed.
To be clear: use of the ATI video chipset on a ThinkPad T400 currently requires
loading a proprietary *VGA option ROM*, loaded into the coreboot ROM image.
Libreboot simply disables that chip and uses coreboot's init code for the Intel
chip instead, with that chip in use exclusively. It can therefore be said that
the ThinkPad T400 is not fully usable in freedom, even by the FSF's conservative
standards. It is *especially* not free by Libreboot standards, because the EC
firmware is non-free, and it is a non-free hardware design, even if it is
nominally free with Libreboot installed.
More detailed insight about microcode More detailed insight about microcode
===================================== =====================================
@ -309,22 +286,8 @@ digress.
**I will continue to develop Libreboot and osboot, in parallel.** **I will continue to develop Libreboot and osboot, in parallel.**
Moral of the story
==================
Compromise and nuance is the name of the game, even if you're the FSF. As of
January 2nd, 2022, [Richard Stallman himself](http://web.archive.org/web/20220102082138/https://stallman.org/stallman-computing.html)
used a ThinkPad T400S with Libreboot installed onto it, with the Intel video
chipset in use. He may not even be aware of the issue with ATI chips, though it
should be said that T400*S* only ever comes with the Intel video chipset (not
ATI). The ATI chipset is only ever available on the regular T400! Libreboot
however would greatly benefit if those ATI chipsets had free init code in
coreboot, because then users could make use of that and have superior performance
for graphical applications, by using the ATI chip instead of the Intel one.
It is currently not possible to do that in freedom.
Other considerations Other considerations
-------------------- ====================
Also not covered strictly by Libreboot: OSHW and Right To Repair. Freedom at Also not covered strictly by Libreboot: OSHW and Right To Repair. Freedom at
the silicon level would however be amazing, and efforts already exist; for the silicon level would however be amazing, and efforts already exist; for
@ -335,11 +298,6 @@ so on). Similarly, Right To Repair (ability to repair your own device, which
implies free access to schematics and diagrams) is critical, for the same implies free access to schematics and diagrams) is critical, for the same
reason that Free Software (Right To Hack) is critical! reason that Free Software (Right To Hack) is critical!
There ought to be a defined scope, in any project, and Libreboot currently has
a very clearly defined scope, but it goes without saying that Libreboot could
be *improved* and *do more* in the future. *RYF is garbage, and should be
replaced; it is far too conservative by modern standards. FSDG is still OK.*
OSHW and Right To Repair are not covered at all by RYF (FSF's Respects Your OSHW and Right To Repair are not covered at all by RYF (FSF's Respects Your
Freedom criteria), the criteria which Libreboot was created to comply with. Freedom criteria), the criteria which Libreboot was created to comply with.
RYF also makes several concessions that are ultimately damaging, such as RYF also makes several concessions that are ultimately damaging, such as
@ -352,6 +310,13 @@ to replace stand-alone mask ROM ICs with compatible flash memory.
Conclusion Conclusion
========== ==========
Compromise and nuance is the name of the game, even if you're the FSF. It is
completely unavoidable, but there are some who try to deny this fact and
pretend like things are as they'd prefer them to be, rather than how they
actually are in the real world.
Facts and *feelings* are usually very different things, and contradictory.
RYF isn't *wrong* per se, just flawed. It is correct in some ways and if RYF isn't *wrong* per se, just flawed. It is correct in some ways and if
complied with, the result *does* give many freedoms to the user, but RYF complied with, the result *does* give many freedoms to the user, but RYF
completely disregards many things that are now possible, including freedoms at completely disregards many things that are now possible, including freedoms at
@ -360,9 +325,6 @@ are written with assumptions that were still true in the 1990s, but the world
has since evolved. As of 2 January 2022, Libreboot still complies strictly with has since evolved. As of 2 January 2022, Libreboot still complies strictly with
RYF, and will continue to do so, at least for the time being. RYF, and will continue to do so, at least for the time being.
Facts and *feelings* are usually very different things, and contradictory.
Such is the nature of life.
The conclusion that should be drawn from all of this is as follows: The conclusion that should be drawn from all of this is as follows:
*Following* FSF criteria does not damage anything, but that criteria is very *Following* FSF criteria does not damage anything, but that criteria is very
@ -375,16 +337,6 @@ of freedom possible now that the RYF guidelines do not cover at all, and in
some cases even actively discourage/dis-incentivize because it makes compromises some cases even actively discourage/dis-incentivize because it makes compromises
based on assumptions that are no longer true. based on assumptions that are no longer true.
Maintaining Libreboot, under the FSF's strict (and simultaneously lax: see
EC loophole) policies, is a fun technical challenge, and it is a *worthwhile*
pursuit. Having free boot firmware on the **host CPU** is very important!!
Freedom is important, at all levels, including what runs merely on the host
CPU, but that is not the *only* level to take into account. All levels should
be considered, and *explored*, with or without the FSF's strict requirement
(currently without). FSF currently looks at Libreboot and thinks that the work
is *done*, when that is far from true, precisely because of the EC firmware
and other freedom issues that remain, on all currently supported mainboards.
Sad truth: RYF actively encourages *less* freedom, by not being bold enough. Sad truth: RYF actively encourages *less* freedom, by not being bold enough.
It pitches a victory flag and says *mission accomplished*, despite the fact It pitches a victory flag and says *mission accomplished*, despite the fact
that the work is *far* from complete! that the work is *far* from complete!
@ -407,5 +359,3 @@ software!
In the year 2022 onwards, we can do better. The RYF program should be cancelled. In the year 2022 onwards, we can do better. The RYF program should be cancelled.
It is no longer fit for purpose. It is no longer fit for purpose.
Think for yourself, and do not let perfection become the enemy of the good.