“The FreeBSD project has received approval from Intel to redistribute firmware for several Intel-based PRO/Wireless devices in the base FreeBSD operating system. The inclusion of firmware for popular Intel wireless devices means that users of FreeBSD will have native wireless support for many Centrino-branded Intel PRO/Wireless devices without downloading additional software. This approval includes firmware for the Intel 2100, 2200BG, 2225BG, 2915ABG, and the 3945ABG devices.”
yeah, I’m happy to hear that! Very good!
fan-frickin-tastic
searously, this is great news. This is one of the only reasons i haven’t used FreeBSD on my laptop.
All of those wireless card models work at the moment except the 3945BG. The difference is that now you won’t have to download anything or install a port to get the wireless interfaces working
Now we need drivers for Broadcom 43XX chipsets WNICs!
And no Ndisilator isn’t working. I wrote a bug report on the 21st of last month but no replies or patches have been sent.
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=109406
If any smart FBSD devs here want to take a look for me I’d be very thankful. I’m going to mention this problem up again in the mailing list today or tommorow.
This is from the OpenBSD man:
“This firmware file is not free because Intel refuses to grant distribution rights without contractual obligations. As a result, even though OpenBSD includes the driver, the firmware file cannot be included and users have to download this file on their own. The official person to state your views to about this issue is [email protected]”
Do you think the other BSDs will follow suit, such as Open, Net and DragonFlyBSD?
I don’t see OpenBSD following suit. They have a history of not using non bsd license compatible software or drivers in their base install. For better or worse, they tend to stick to their guns.
Yeah but who want to use OpenBSD on their laptop?
It has no ACPI power managment support to speak of. Many new laptops today don’t support the old APM standard.
It is in -Current, and thus I assume it will be in 4.1 in the near future.
“Yeah but who want to use OpenBSD on their laptop? ”
I and many others.
“It has no ACPI power managment support to speak of.”
It’s in development and getting better every day.
“They have a history of not using non bsd license compatible software or drivers in their base install.”
This does not apply to firmware. Closed-source firmware is perfectly fine, the problem is the Intel distribution license.
Edited 2007-03-08 02:58
I assume FreeBSD will still be released under the BSD license, but what about the package FreeBSD + Intel drivers? Will it be BSD, BSD + Commercial, or maybe something else?
The article doesn’t speak to which license it will be released under, but it does say:
————————–
In order to use the firmware provided by Intel, FreeBSD users must first agree with the license. FreeBSD developers have added a simple mechanism to the operating system to agree to the license by defining an easy-to-use
system variable.
i.e. The firmware has its own license, separate from FBSD. You need to explicitly agree to it to use it.
One of the things that has my attention on FreeBSD is that it’s very simple for a Linux admin to set up and also make it function like the way it should.
I also dig the fact that the license isn’t as restrictive in terms of source release as the GPL may be.
I personally don’t care whether or not a driver is in binary or source form, nor do I care whether a piece of software comes as binary or in source form. All I expect it to do is run. Period.
I’ve been looking at FreeBSD to replace some of our Linux servers but still have mucho testing to do for the environments. Unfortunately, VMWare isn’t available for FreeBSD as a host environment. Fortunately, FreeBSD is just as happy running in a VM as it would be on a real dedicated machine.
Gentoo is an option, and it’s ports-like ability makes it very viable for me and what I want it to do, but it’s not as easy to install as FreeBSD is from the minimum CD’s.
All I expect it to do is run. Period.
Yeah, we all want that. The big questions, as always, are how long will it run, at what cost and under what obligations and conditions?
GPL might not be everybodies cup of tea, but at least it requires nothing of me as a mere user. If I would want to (re)distribute, that’s when the GPL begins to have some teeth.
“One of the things that has my attention on FreeBSD is that it’s very simple for a Linux admin to set up and also make it function like the way it should.”
I may extend this statement: With basic UNIX knowledge you won’t encounter any serious problem installing and setting up FreeBSD. Linux basics are a very good way to achieve this goal.
“Unfortunately, VMWare isn’t available for FreeBSD as a host environment.”
The VMWare host system was working in FreeBSD 4, as far as I remember, but since version 5 there’s a problem with certain kernel modules and / or system services.
“Gentoo is an option, and it’s ports-like ability makes it very viable for me and what I want it to do, but it’s not as easy to install as FreeBSD is from the minimum CD’s.”
To install the base system, you just need one CD, the first one. It features a live file system for maintenance and diagnostics as well. The further CDs can be used to install applications if no Internet connection is available. If it is, the Ports Collection is productive as long as you know what you’re doing.
This is sweet. Me does a happy dance
>Yeah but who want to use OpenBSD on their laptop?
>
>It has no ACPI power managment support to speak of. Many >new laptops today don’t support the old APM standard.
What are you talking about, ACPI works great on several laptops and the development about ACPI in OpenBSD is very active.
I use it on my day-2-day laptop and it works great.
Have you even tried?
Until Intel allow everybody to freely distribute their freeware OpenBSD will probobly not include it. FreeBSD has once again sold out to big corporations. Sad to see them sell out their beliefs for market share.
It really is terrible that FreeBSD has given it’s users things like Java packages and wireless firmware. Wow, pretty soon they might get us Flash too! These evil spirits, no wonder their mascot is a DEVIL!!!
Seriously, this whole zealot thing is being blown way out of proportion by the likes of Theo and his gang. If you don’t like the license then just don’t agree and guess what, you don’t have to use it. What a concept. Here’s another idea, if you don’t like how FreeBSD sells out, don’t use it.
It’s very annoying having people come onto these forums and bash FreeBSD for getting their users tools they need. I want my wireless card to work with as little pain as possible. If you don’t then don’t use the firmware. It really is that simple.
Well if FreeBSD’s sellout wouldn’t affect me I couldn’t care less but guess what, it does.
When FreeBSD agrees and signs these agreements Intel know that some will think this is ok and force others to sign the same to use the firmware which affects OpenBSD. This affects more than FreeBSD but some people seems to have a hard time understanding that.
Why is it always used “zealot” when the only thing they are stickin up for is YOUR freedom?
Being a zealot is not a bad thing so, don’t get so defensive.
The problem I have is when people think that they are sticking up for my freedom, as you put it. My freedom is that of choice. I can choose to use or not use a particular OS based on whether or not I like it and agree with the principles of it. If FreeBSD or any other operating system starts to sign these agreements and you do not like them then simply stop using that OS.
That is the freedom we all have. This rhetoric about sticking up for my freedom is a bit of crap. I mean, if you want to get right down to it, the freedom of FreeBSD is that if you disagree with them just start another OS and call it DragonFlyBSD or something. Then you can get rid of the firmware and everyone will be free of the horrible, nasty, bad, vile firmware…BOO!
“Seriously, this whole zealot thing is being blown way out of proportion by the likes of Theo and his gang. If you don’t like the license then just don’t agree and guess what, you don’t have to use it.”
You should try to actually understand the issue.
The problem is not with liking the license or not, the problem is that it is not LEGAL to distribute the firmware unless *THE END-USER* has agreed to the license.
How convenient will this be when there’s 20 different variables for 20 different manufacturers and their licenses?
And please Matt Olander of iXsystems , this has NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with protecting intellectual property. No one’s asking Intel to open-source their firmware, just that the binary firmware blob is freely distributable.
you wrote: Sad to see them sell out their beliefs for market share.
The way I see it, FreeBSD has given you the choice to use it (or not). It is not turned on / loaded by default.
Edited 2007-03-08 18:07
While the concept of OSS is good, taking it to the extreme of not supporting, or including non Open Source software (like the GPL2 only on Linux for example) is not good for the customers, and technicians. And if a license agreement is needed, include it at the system installation, or package installation phase, also warning the user that if the person denies the agreement, the hardware will not be supported (available) on the system.
That would make everyone happy.
PS. And except maybe for lawyers, who reads a license these days???
People in court after ignoring to read a license perhaps? :o)
I haven’t heard of anyone going to court for installing Flash or Acrobat without reading the license, lol.
yeah, but do you read all licenses from all the software you install on a Windows machine? I dunno.
But do not get me wrong, I prefer OSS, but people always complain companies for lack of support for other operating systems, and then bash those companies because they provide non OSS solutions later.