Does FreeBSD include nonfree firmware blobs in the kernel?

fnoyanisi

fnoyanisi

In this link, it is stated that (under the BSD Systems section)
FreeBSD, NetBSD, and OpenBSD all include instructions for obtaining nonfree programs in their ports system. In addition, their kernels include nonfree firmware blobs.
Click to expand...
I think, this is not the case for FreeBSD, is it?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It is very much the case, for example the firmware files for iwn(4) are all in the source tree without source code. In case you didn't know one of the goals of the FreeBSD project has been to be as business friendly as possible while being open source and that includes allowing closed source firmware blobs in the OS.
 
fnoyanisi said:
In this link, it is stated that (under the BSD Systems section)
...
FreeBSD, NetBSD, and OpenBSD all include instructions for obtaining nonfree programs in their ports system. In addition, their kernels include nonfree firmware blobs.
....
I think, this is not the case for FreeBSD, is it?
Click to expand...
Oh please. People/kids who read this post note that this is a FSF BS propaganda. I am not sure about other BSDs but OpenBSD kernel doesn't include any binary blob crud. It does inject some microcode necessary for various CPUs to work. Network firmware is optional and installed after the first boot.

On the another hand Linux is proprietary OS with almost 40-50% of close source code and I am not just counting numerous NDAs but fully close source code developed by companies.

All those hardware RAID cards which work "out of box" on Linux but don't work on BSDs is proprietary code. That is just a tip of the iceberg.Don't make me go on that proprietary Broadcom and NVidia crud which work "out of box".

Also good luck with Linux code base which is 30-50 times bigger than OpenBSD for example.
 
Yeah, the Linux kernel is ridiculously bloated. I'd rather have support for good hardware/drivers (or our own open drivers) than all hardware/drivers; which of most are crap. ZFS eliminates the need for hardware RAID which keeps things nice and slim in base.
 
What is really funny is all those forks of existing Linux distros that basically strip away all those binary blobs and then claim to be more "free" than the original distro. What good does it do when you still have to download the same bloody blobs to make your hardware to work?
 
kpa said:
What is really funny is all those forks of existing Linux distros that basically strip away all those binary blobs and then claim to be more "free" than the original distro. What good does it do when you still have to download the same bloody blobs to make your hardware to work?
Click to expand...

Makes no good....if truth be told I think - no offence - it is waste of time and labour.
 
There are some ambiguous ideas about blobs. I saw some comments stating that some drivers are blobs just because contain fpga netlists (i.e. creative sound cards drivers). This is just really bad. In the same way, microcode updates could.be considered as blobs too.
 
In fairness, many of the Free as in speech Linux distros do offer alternatives to the non-free programs or drivers. They don't always work as well. Nouveau for NVidia is one instance where I gave up on it, but I have a friend who took it as a challenge and can do almost anything on his desktop.

An advantage is that if enough people use Nouveau, and it gets knocked into really good shape, there would be no more need to worry about NVidia drivers, at least until the next generation of cards came out. However, if one uses an alternative O/S, such as Linux or a BSD, one usually has to pick their hardware anyway.
 
scottro said:
In fairness, many of the Free as in speech Linux distros do offer alternatives to the non-free programs or drivers. They don't always work as well. Nouveau for NVidia is one instance where I gave up on it, but I have a friend who took it as a challenge and can do almost anything on his desktop.

An advantage is that if enough people use Nouveau, and it gets knocked into really good shape, there would be no more need to worry about NVidia drivers, at least until the next generation of cards came out. However, if one uses an alternative O/S, such as Linux or a BSD, one usually has to pick their hardware anyway.
Click to expand...

Talking About free drivers... AMD/ATI Radeon driver, is one of those cases. It performs really good, and sometimes better than fglrx on Linux. However, sometimes, incompatibilities with MESA make some games glitch, or even crash (i.e. Serious Sam 3).
 
fnoyanisi said:
In this link, it is stated that (under the BSD Systems section)
...
FreeBSD, NetBSD, and OpenBSD all include instructions for obtaining nonfree programs in their ports system. In addition, their kernels include nonfree firmware blobs.
....
I think, this is not the case for FreeBSD, is it?
Click to expand...

Unfortunately for some things to work you're going to need proprietary drivers, it's not reasonable to expect hardware vendors to hand over information that would help their competitors. Often proprietary drivers are better quality and perform better as well.

A company like Nvidia wouldn't bother to make their driver for FreeBSD any good, if they couldn't keep the important bits hidden.

It's the way it goes.
 
zspider said:
Often proprietary drivers are better quality and perform better as well.
Click to expand...
This is ridiculous statement. If I don't have a data sheet for a device I can't write a driver. If I have a data sheet I (or programmers better than me) write a driver which is equal or better quality. It is as simple as that. Microsoft doesn't endorse installation of kernel drivers which are not pre-approved means they need to see the data sheet and the code before they endorse a vendor. 95% of Windows crashes comes from uneducated users who are installing random binary blob crap found on the Internet.

zspider said:
A company like Nvidia wouldn't bother to make their driver for FreeBSD any good, if they couldn't keep the important bits hidden.
Click to expand...
I thought that NVidia was in business of selling hardware not writing software or cherry picking which OS vendor they will support.
 
Oko said:
This is ridiculous statement. If I don't have a data sheet for a device I can't write a driver. If I have a data sheet I (or programmers better than me) write a driver which is equal or better quality. It is as simple as that. Microsoft doesn't endorse installation of kernel drivers which are not pre-approved means they need to see the data sheet and the code before they endorse a vendor. 95% of Windows crashes comes from uneducated users who are installing random binary blob crap found on the Internet.
Click to expand...

Unless things have changed drastically since the last time I was in contact with the Microsoft's certification systems you had no obligation to give them the source code. What they did back then in their certification testing is that they took your binaries and ran them in a simulated environment with all kinds of tests with all kinds of error conditions and checked how well your driver/application behaved and then reported back to you if your driver/application passed the tests. The actual testing work was outsourced already when I was dealing with it, MS just defined the tests and provided the testing framework.
 
Gaming is irrelevant, and an incredibly small subset of computing. I chuckle every-time I hear a Stallman zealot predicting the doom of Windows over an insignificant increase in game title support. The whole Nouveau reinvention is a complete joke also.

To finish it off, I quote Alan Kay; such words couldn't be more true.
 
I live in the "real world" ; run the OS which will work, then run whatever OS you'd prefer in a 64bit VM. Now, it's all good...
 
RichardET said:
I live in the "real world" ; run the OS which will work, then run whatever OS you'd prefer in a 64bit VM. Now, it's all good...
Click to expand...

VM's are good for specific tasks (running a server, running -CURRENT to test a piece of code etc...), but I am not really a fan of VMs for daily tasks, they don't give the real feeling. The OS you use is like the car you drive, you should enjoy it!.

I find it a bit cruel to "dislike" GNU project/people, as a matter of fact, FreeBSD project has long been using software written by GNU/FSF people. Hats off! Although not being a part of the system now (after LLVM/clang), GCC is the first thing that pop ups in my mind.

If my NEC would only work with a binary blob, I am OK with that, no objections from me....But it would be nice to have a working FOSS alternative (I am concerned more about the philosophy of it rather than being paranoid about privacy)
 
The GNU/FSF people have also used huge amounts of software originating from the original BSD project so the score is quite even I guess :p
 
Yes, freeBSD kernel unfortunately have binary blobs. (I pray for the sucess in all works in progress to remove them)
Trisquel & Parabola (both w/deblobed kernels) run perfectly on my hardware. I work on several laptop and desktop computers (also at my office work) and all of them runs w/Trisquel & Parabola. If the wifi card not works (the most common issue for my) simply I use another free-hardware. This is not (only) FSF or the GPL-license propaganda. It's the dream of enjoy, in this real & terrible world, with fully free operative systems.
 
Is there a BSD now?
Written from scratch
Without a BLOB in the kernel base and port
Just like Dragora GNU/Linux-Libre
with the BSD license ?

Or not ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top