Libreboot Creator Says After Coding a Fork for 'GNU Boot Project', FSF Sent a Cease-and-Desist Letter Over Its Name

Libreboot is a distribution of coreboot "aimed at replacing the proprietary BIOS firmware contained by most computers," according to Wikipedia. It was briefly part of the GNU project, until maintainer Leah Rowe and the GNU project agreed to part ways in 2017.

But here in 2023, the GNU project has created a fork of Libreboot named GNU Boot... The GNU Boot fork "currently does not have a website and does not have any releases of its own," points out Libreboot's Leah Rowe, adding "My intent is to help them, and they are free — encouraged — to re-use my work... " But things have gotten messy, writes Rowe: They forked Libreboot, due to disagreement with Libreboot's Binary Blob Reduction Policy. This is a pragmatic policy, enacted in November 2022, to increase the number of coreboot users by increasing the amount of hardware supported in Libreboot... I wish GNU Boot all the best success. Truly. Although I think their project is entirely misguided (for reasons explained by modern Libreboot policy), I do think there is value in it. It provides continuity for those who wish to use something resembling the old Libreboot project...

When GNU Boot first launched, as a failed hostile fork of Libreboot under the same name, I observed: their code repository was based on Libreboot from late 2022, and their website based on Libreboot in late 2021. Their same-named Libreboot site was announced during LibrePlanet 2023... [N]ow they are calling themselves GNU Boot, and it is indeed GNU, but it still has the same problem as of today: still based on very old Libreboot, and they don't even have a website. According to [the FSF's Savannah software repository], GNU Boot was created on 11 June 2023. Yet no real development, in over a month since then...

I've decided that I want to help them... I decided recently that I'd simply make a release for them, exactly to their specifications (GNU Free System Distribution Guidelines), talking favourably about FSF/GNU, and so on. I'm in a position to do it (thus scratching the itch), so why not? I did this release for them — it's designated non-GeNUine Boot 20230717, and I encourage them to re-use this in their project, to get off the ground. This completely leapfrogs their current development; it's months ahead. Months. It's 8 months ahead, since their current revision is based upon Libreboot from around ~October 2022...

The GNU Boot people actually sent me a cease and desist email, citing trademark infringement. Amazing...

I complied with their polite request and have renamed the project to non-GeNUine Boot. The release archive was re-compiled, under this new brand name and the website was re-written accordingly. Personally, I like the new name better.

What's the story here?

[The Evil Atheist]

That this guy tried to release something with a name that GNU has a trademark for, and under trademark law GNU is obliged to defend it or risk losing it, but this guy thinks GNU should be bowing their heads in gratitude?

It's trademark law, and this guy needs to understand how it works.

Re:

[DraconPern]

He is getting a letter for doing something that all Linux distributions do. And that is release GNU software under the GNU name. That gcc that you use isn't actually release by GNU, it's a compiled release by the distro that has patches and code changes different from what GNU provides. Yet distros use the GNU name. So, currently open source operates on a coop trademark gentle's agreement. But if they are sending letters to people then that's going to lead to the iceweasel issue all over a

Re:

[The Evil Atheist]

You have completely misconstrued the issue.

Those Linux distributions simply package the software. This can't be infringing because they're not separate projects. They're THE project itself.

This guy is maintaining a separate project and used a name that was potentially infringing on a trademark.

You seem unable to comprehend that these are completely different activities in nature.

Re:

[mysidia]

This guy is maintaining a separate project and used a name that was potentially infringing on a trademark.

If what the summary says is correct, then GNU Boot have not released a product, and they don't have a website, So maybe GNU has No valid trademark to begin with, And this new guy does, since they are the first to use the name in trade.

You cannot have a Trademark without using the name in commerce;
Certifying you're using the mark in commerce (Attached to a product or service) is typically a registrati

Re:What's the story here?

[Entrope]

If what the summary says is correct, then GNU Boot have not released a product, and they don't have a website, So maybe GNU has No valid trademark to begin with, And this new guy does, since they are the first to use the name in trade.

That's not how trademark law works. FSF uses the GNU name for computer software. They registered that as a trademark. This guy cannot use the GNU name for computer software without their permission. If they allow random people to use the name without permission, they will lose the trademark in a legal sense.

To be more specific, the scope of a trademark is not the specific kind of software "bootloaders" or the specific name "GNU Boot". It's at the level of "GNU" and broader categories of computer software. The FSF's trademark registration lists a whole lot of kings of computer software, including "Computer operating programs and computer operating systems" and "Computer utility programs" that might cover bootloaders.

Re:What's the story here?

[AleRunner]

I don't see anywhere that the FSF or GNU org revoked their license. Am I missing that?

What you are missing is that it's a limited license, allowing anyone who uses the software released by the libreboot project belonging to the FSF, which is part of GNU to use the name libreboot to refer to it. You cannot, for example, call general linux "libreboot" even though you could probably write a boot system based on it. When the software is forked elsewhere that is no longer the libreboot becuase, although your license is still valid, that license doesn't cover the new case.

They don't need to revoke their license, in other words, since it never covered the new project being called libreboot. Specifically, the really correct thing is happening under trademark law. There's a new changed product, a boot system which includes binary blobs and that new system is being made to use a new name so that it isn't confused with the old system.

Re:What's the story here?

[Anubis IV]

What you are missing is that it's a limited license, allowing anyone who uses the software released by the libreboot project belonging to the FSF, which is part of GNU to use the name libreboot to refer to it. You cannot, for example, call general linux "libreboot" even though you could probably write a boot system based on it.

Except that libreboot doesn’t belong to the FSF, isn’t part of GNU, and basically has nothing to do with this dispute, other than being part of its historical context.

The issue is basically this:
1) GNU and person X have dispute over X’s libreboot

2) GNU forks libreboot and calls it GNU Boot

3) GNU Boot is way behind and not getting updated

4) X compiles a release that they call “GNU Boot” without permission from GNU that includes changes that aren’t yet actually part of the official GNU Boot

Regardless of X’s intentions, that’s pretty obviously trademark infringement. If they had actually wanted to help in a legal manner, they’d have submitted their changes to GNU Boot’s repo and helped them along, not created a new project with the same name.

Re:

[raynet]

Though I don't think X called it "GNU Boot" but "non-GeNUine Boot".

Re:

[Anubis IV]

It was renamed that in response to the C&D letter.

Re:

[Speare]

Watch out, now Muskelon will issue a Cease and Desist against you for using his trademark.

Re:

[AleRunner]

Chanks for the correction BTW. I hereby

sled "s/Libreboot/GNU Boot/g" /dev/comments/previous

and all is well in the world.

Re:

[mysidia]

FSF uses the GNU name for computer software. They registered that as a trademark

No. The FSF have something called the GNU project. GNU Boot may be a member, but the GNU Boot maintainer does Not become a duly authorized agent of the foundation -- and that registration cover GNU not GNU Boot.

I'm sure the FSF do nothing to condone the condescending unprofessional communications made by a GNU Boot team member; GNU Project software developers who have 1 Project to their name and associate members of the fo

Re:

[cb88]

Linux distrobutions are by definition separate projects from most free software.... there are some excepts for things developed specificially by a certain distro but all in all no single distro develops all of its software in house... that is a fact.

Re:

[moronoxyd]

So... when the GNU people forked Libreboot under the same name it was ok, but when others to it to them it's not?

Also, the "you have to defend your trademark or you loose it" stuff is not true (or at least not as simple as these statements make it sound).

Re:

[Arnonyrnous Covvard]

"hostile fork of Libreboot under the same name"

Re:

[The Evil Atheist]

When you fork a project, it might take a while to change all the references to the old name. The fact is, they DID change everything to use the new "GNU Boot" name. Without needing to being threatened, it would seem.

What's the problem?

Re:

[WereCatf]

When you fork a project, it might take a while to change all the references to the old name.

Except the GNU folks even went and called it Libreboot and their project on LibrePlanet -- that's not something that just happens, that's something that requires active action to do and is thus deliberate. Also, it doesn't actually take more than a couple minutes to quickly grep through all the project's files and change references to 'Libreboot' to whatever you like.

Re:

[The Evil Atheist]

Then why did they eventually change it to GNU Boot?

You in your other reply tried to make it sound like they went after the Libreboot name, when in fact that hasn't happened. We know it hasn't happened, because Libreboot still belongs to the originator, and not GNU.

Seems like you are deliberately trying to muddy the issue.

Re: What's the story here?

[guruevi]

No, you misunderstand. GNU created a hostile fork of Libreboot and named it Libreboot claiming the term Libre in software belongs to the GNU project and the current Libreboot project wasnâ(TM)t truly Libre because binary blobs.

When the core maintainer of Libreboot called them out, they renamed their project GNU Boot. And forked Libreboot from 2021 and then did nothing further.

The Libreboot developer then develops and releases a patched GNU Boot fork to the world. The GNU project sends a cease and desist claiming (read the email) other devs have no right to release GNU software forks on non-GNU project sites and the devs rename their fork non-GeNUine boot.

Re:

[The Evil Atheist]

So what's the problem then? Names were changed, the matter's settled.

FSF has certain trademarks it needs to protect. It's nothing out of the ordinary.

Maybe people need to learn about how the law works, and just because you work on code doesn't mean the law doesn't apply. Just because the code is free doesn't mean laws don't apply. Hell, even Bill Gates tried to use that argument against open source in court, saying that laws don't apply to open source because they're not looking to profit from it.

J

Re:

[guruevi]

But that's not in the spirit of open source. You should be able to release a patched version of a dead project. Nobody here claimed they were the owners of the GNU name. If I clone GNU Hurd's git repo on my GitHub, by this new definition, that means I'm now trademark infringing on GNU even though it is very clear that it isn't my project.

Re:

[strikethree]

Thank you for the clear summary.

Sometimes, I don't feel entirely sane, but when I see this kind of thing happening, I realize that my insanities are molehills compared to the mountains walking around me.

Re:

[The Evil Atheist]

What kind of a moron uses the "friend/foe" thing? What even is that?

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

"this guy"

Leah, it's a girl's name, mentioned in the summary.

Re:

[The Evil Atheist]

Uhh... it's just as risky to try to gender someone by their name. You say it's a "girl's name" (but Leah's old enough to be called a woman), but these days it's just really hard to tell, considering that the internet is full of people from other countries, where the spelling of the name is a "woman's" name in one language, but is a man's name in some other language.

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

Okay, well now you know.

Delve further into the history of Rowe's past with the GNU organisation and you'll understand the need not to dead-gender her.

Re:

[The Evil Atheist]

I know now.

I didn't know when I made the original comment. Therefore, I did not dead-gender her, because it was not deliberate at the time.

Learn how time works. You can't accuse me of doing something when I was not aware of the situation before.

Re: What's the story here?

[guruevi]

These days some of the crazies will tell you you shouldâ(TM)ve known which of the 30+ genders they are merely on sight of their name.

But âoeheâ is the correct English term in case gender is unknown.

Re:

[The Evil Atheist]

No it's not. It's always been "they".

Re:

[guruevi]

The APA and Chicago Style manual disagrees.

Re:

[aRTeeNLCH]

Word of warning, if an unseen Andrea , Simone and Luca agree online in a text chat to join you naked in a hot tub during your holidays in Italy, you may be in for a surprise...

Re:

[_merlin]

Also Nicola. Two Italian MAME developers, Nicola Salmoria and Luca Elia, have been known to trip up English speakers.

Re:

[aRTeeNLCH]

Right, forgot about Nicola. I even know a guy by that name.

For kicks I just asked ChatGPT for some help...:

Certainly! Here are five more names that are girls' names in English and boys' names in Italian:

Alex
Luca
Gabriele
Dani
Stefano

So yeah, a bit of hallucinating there, but Gabriele and Daniele indeed fit the bill. In what language Stefano is a girl I couldn't tell, perhaps a language dreamt up by ChatGPT...

Re:

[AmiMoJo]

It's best to just use "they" if you are not certain, or spend a few seconds checking. It's a lot like making sure you spell someone's name right, and there are lots of alternative spellings for common names (including Leah/Leigha/Lia/Lea and Rowe/Row/Rou).

Obviously you didn't do it intentionally so no big deal. Changing times, people still getting the hand of things.

Re:

[tlhIngan]

It's best to just use "they" if you are not certain, or spend a few seconds checking. It's a lot like making sure you spell someone's name right, and there are lots of alternative spellings for common names (including Leah/Leigha/Lia/Lea and Rowe/Row/Rou).

Obviously you didn't do it intentionally so no big deal. Changing times, people still getting the hand of things.

Or you look at their preferred pronouns. Sure, it seems like a "woke" thing when people put their pronouns on their bio page (you know, he/him,

Re:

[kmoser]

This would have been even more confusing if they were named Mike Rowe [wikipedia.org].

Re:

[test321]

EXAMPLES IN USA

Noah Cyrus (2000-), American singer, sister of a famous person, FEMALE
Noah Levine (1971-), American poet, son of a famous person, MALE

Alexis Dziena (1984-), American actress, FEMALE
Alexis Denisof (1966-), American actor, MALE

EXAMPLES IN FRANCE

Camille de Soyécourt (1757-1849), Higher mother of the order or Carmel, FEMALE
Camille Desmoulins (1760-1794), Hero of the French revolution, MALE

Dominique Berna (1964-), French champion of judo, FEMALE
Dominique Bernard, French television actor, MAL

Re:

[Cochonou]

Which places impose rules on male/female names ? I mean outside of the religiously radical places ?

Re:

[_merlin]

Some countries that speak Slavic languages have these requirements.

Re:

[test321]

Which places impose rules on male/female names

I am aware it happens in Portugal. Código do Registo Civil art. 103 2.a) The current Code in force (look for art. 103): https://www.pgdlisboa.pt/leis/... [pgdlisboa.pt] Version for citizen: https://irn.justica.gov.pt/Ser... [justica.gov.pt] "o primeiro nome próprio não pode suscitar dúvidas quanto ao sexo"

Re:

[aRTeeNLCH]

There was a story in the news about a German couple in Italy who couldn't name their child as they wanted. Their baby daughter only got her name "Andrea" by IIRC registering her through the German embassy, Italian officials claimed it would be cruel to give a girl a boy's name. Both parents being German and planning on leaving Italy for Germany in the near future didn't go through as arguments...

Re:

[Kazymyr]

Most if not all Romance languages have distinct rules for male vs female names (French, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, Romanian etc.)

Re: What's the story here?

[Martin Blank]

Sweden, not exactly a bastion of religious zealotry, has a baby name registry that can deny permission to assign a name based on several factors including offensive, potential discomfort to the person being named, and other inappropriateness.

Re:

[Pentium100]

In some languages, the gender of a word is determined by the ending of the word. This includes names. With very few exceptions, reading a name of a person gives you the information what his/her gender is. I don't think you would be allowed to name a child with the wrong gender name. You can have a similar name, but need to change the ending to match. For example, in Lithuania, you can give your child a name that means "diamond", for girls it is "Deimante" (imagine a dot on top of the last e - I know /. does

Re:

[groobly]

Look at this person's blog. The person claims to be non-binary, once claimed to be woman, and now only claims to be non-male. Draw your own conclusions. https://vimuser.org/nonbinary.... [vimuser.org]

Re:

[WereCatf]

1) Guy developed Libreboot 2) GNU forked Libreboot, then tried to claim it was their project and steal the Libreboot-name from the original guy 3) GNU took forever to abandon the above approach and finally renamed their fork to GNU Boot 4) Guy noted the shoddy shape of the fork, tried to help by making a one-off release of up-to-date everything, including using 'GNU Boot' in this one-off thing, but the guy made it clear what the purpose was and that it was not the official GNU fork 5) GNU folks threw a hiss

Re:

[The Evil Atheist]

But they didn't try to claim it was their project, and they didn't steal the Libreboot name. They changed the name to GNU Boot, WITHOUT being told to do so, seemingly.

And the trademark is all they have.

[Larsen E Whipsnade]

At least in this case.

What ruins so many open source projects is the toxic egos involved. Too much nerd rage.

Re:

[cb88]

People are EFFING stupid. EOF

What's your story here?

[OneOfMany07]

You need to read what is posted.

Are jokes based on your original name copyrighted also? Puns? I'm not a lawyer, but I'll bet it's a gray area.

Does it matter they decided to claim someone else's work just like they're angry Linus did to them? I think so.

Re:

[jonadab]

Yeah, he's confused about what the GNU project is and how they do things. Specifically, he's looking for pragmatism, and that's just not something the FSF does. To him, the fact that they'd been months without a usable release was a problem that needed to be fixed, but that's not the kind of thing that registers as a problem on their radar. To him, someone pitching in to solve the problem seemed like a practical solution, and picky little details like being officially appointed to do so by the FSF didn't

What's the point of a fork...

[Alwin Henseler]

...when hardly any actual forking is done? Where forking = development of said fork.

Ignoring the (non) desirability of having forks in the first place: any value (?) of a fork derives from being meaningful different from its parent project, right? No difference = no point in having a fork. Very different -> fork may hold value in some way.

Read: to provide value, a fork should pull away from its parent project. If eg. the only goal is to remove binary blobs, then "take parent project's source,

Re:

[The Evil Atheist]

The point is the legal differences.

You do know licensing issues exist, right? Just because you're a computer nerd doesn't mean issues outside of the tech space doesn't exist.

Re:

[Alwin Henseler]

Totally understood. My point being: in this case, to enjoy [benefit of legal differences], fork should be different enough from parent project, that such legal differences apply. And thus implies work on that fork to make it so.

No pain (from forking) = no gain (from having forked project be different in some useful way).

The bill will come next

[paulidale]

I expect that the bill for their "legal" services will come next....

The first thing to do when you want to help

[Opportunist]

Is to ask whether they want any.

Else you just come across like the religious asshat telling me that Jesus died for my sins. It's not like I asked him to do so, so don't expect me to be thankful.

Re: The first thing to do when you want to help

[SuperDre]

But that's not how open source projects work.

Re:

[Opportunist]

I highly doubt that if I jam my code into the Linux kernel pretending to "help" the Linux Kernel team, they'll rejoice and kiss my feet.

If I fork the Kernel, I fork it. But I shouldn't expect them to be in any way thankful for doing so, or for trying to insert my changes into their stuff.

Fucking politics

[Anonymous Coward]

This is why I don't contribute to FOSS any more. The software and build systems aren't the difficulty, it's all the fucking ass-hats at the other end of the email.

Re:

[moronoxyd]

You really have a strange way of communicating, calling people "dipshits" and "illiterate" left and right.

Re:Fucking politics

[solidraven]

Kind of funny, you're demonstrating the exact sort of behaviour why folks like myself and OP stopped contributing to opensource projects. Mirror, mirror on the wall, who's the biggest dipshit of them all. Your behaviour in this comments section is a massive discredit to the opensource community.

Re:

[Waccoon]

My experience is that if people aren't getting paid money to do work, they need to indulge in some other form of profit. That means ego.

There are very, VERY big egos in the FOSS community.

I still contribute, but I'm very picky. If there's a "Code of Conduct", I just stay the hell away.

Libreboot ...

[Savage-Rabbit]

Libreboot Creator Says After Coding a Fork for 'GNU Boot Project', FSF Sent a Cease-and-Desist Letter Over Its Name

Ok, I say troll them by changing the name to AyCarmbaBootaLibre or just BootaLibre for short.

Re:

[cascadingstylesheet]

BootaLibre for short.

Why not "BootyLibre"?

Re:Libreboot ...

[Alwin Henseler]

How about ehm... Booty McBootface?

Re:

[kackle]

+1.

Re:

[dgatwood]

Libreboot Creator Says After Coding a Fork for 'GNU Boot Project', FSF Sent a Cease-and-Desist Letter Over Its Name

Ok, I say troll them by changing the name to AyCarmbaBootaLibre or just BootaLibre for short.

Wildeboot. It's linguistically equivalent to GNU boot, but not legally equivalent. :-D

Re:

[hawk]

bringing to mind apple responding to complaints by switching a codename to "BHA" . . .

[which reportedly made him even angrier when he learned what it meant . . .]

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re: Just Why

[SuperDre]

No, the idea was to help GNU boot get up to the latest version as nothing had been done with the GNU boot project since it forked from the Libreboot version, so in all GNU boot was/is pointless, only thing they did till now was change the name from LibreBoot to GNU boot, nothing else.

Re:

[caseih]

Meddle? Who's meddling? He simply created a release of his own project that the GNU boot guys could rebase off of so they'd have a very up-to-date snapshot to work off of. The name of the snapshot (the release tag) included the GNU trademark in it. It's not like named his project GNU Boot or anything. I'm not convinced the folks behind the GNU Boot fork had much to do with the cease and desist letter. Perhaps it was just an automatic thing from the FSF which holds the trademark on GNU. As they say, n

Re:

[The Evil Atheist]

They did name their project GNU Boot. That's why they sent a letter telling them to stop using the name. And they got all pissy about it. It's just a name change.

GNU/Linux

[bill_mcgonigle]

Sounds like it's dangerous to call anything we use "GNU/Linux".

Nobody wants to mess around in trademark waters unless absolutely necessary.

Re: GNU/Linux

[SuperDre]

Trademark protection doesn't let you just choose which use you enforce or not, you HAVE to enforce it, or give written permission for using it. If you don't actively enforce it, like one project you don't care about and another you do, you can lose the trademark.

Re:

[Alwin Henseler]

"GNU/Linux" isn't even accurate.

It is (or mostly, was) sometimes used to refer to GNU based OS running on Linux kernel. Like how *BSD refers to BSD userland + matching kernel, maintained as a whole.

That's not how it works. Linux distributions come in many shapes & sizes, which primarily have "using Linux kernel" in common. Some may use non-GNU userland, most will include packages from 1001 sources, including but not limited to GNU software. Components are maintained by many diff

Minifree

[sinij]

A plug for Libreboot, if you want minimum effort exposure to it, Minifree [minifree.org] offers laptops with it installed and ready to go. For the lazy (I also have one).

Achilles' heel of open source

[Tony Isaac]

While open source software has provided huge benefits for software, it does have one annoying Achilles' heel. Forks can be a good thing--for example making it possible to continue development of an open source project that went closed source. They can also enable taking development of software in new directions that the original developers don't buy into. But they also lead to confusion and fragmentation.

I believe that one reason we will never see a "year of the Linux desktop" is because of this fragmentati

Re:

[kackle]

I believe that one reason we will never see a "year of the Linux desktop" is because of this fragmentation.

You are correct, and here's a data point. If I want to dabble in Linux, even as a computing nerd, I don't even know where to start. Wikipedia tells me there are dozens of distros, and I don't want to pick a dying one, only to waste my time learning it. So, I have no horse in this race precisely because of the number of choices, and I will stay away, getting done what I need to get done, elsewhere.

Re:

[caseih]

Sorry no. You simply don't want to learn Linux. Period. And that's okay. Just stop using the notion of choice and possibly choosing a dying distro as your excuse rather than just saying you have no interest in Linux.

Besides that, the whole notion is just silly. You'd be wasting your time picking a dying distro? If your goal is truly to learn the ins and outs of Linux, then the distro doesn't really matter. The skills are transferable. *Every* distro I've ever used has died. I mean each version of an

Re:

[kackle]

(This specifically refers to the Linux desktop.)

I don't like when Windows changes either. But I wrote multimedia-based code for it 25 years ago and it still works in Windows 11, unchanged!

I recently gave my boss the '...pry Windows 7 computer from my cold, dead hands' speech. It's not because I think it's terrific, it's that I'm trying to get things done(tm) and don't want any resistance to that, especially from an OS, which, in my opinion, should be nearly transparent. My goal is not to learn the

Re:

[caseih]

It's not that you're not being listened to because you're an outsider. It's that your statements are arguments that invite debate and, well, argument. If you approach all communities in this way, you'll find very few of them welcoming and wanting to help.

Your original argument was quite novel and give me a bit of a chuckle, I'll give you that. I've heard of lots of reasons for decision paralysis but I've never considered distro paralysis angle before! Do you also have similar issues picking a software de

Re:

[kackle]

I don't want to argue, either. I'm just saying that if I have a certain perspective (even if mistaken), others likely share it. I mean, where [wikimedia.org] does one even start? (I've seen the same issue with the Arduinos--so many incompatible boards now.)

In my decades, I guess I'm tired of having learned sizeable systems only to have them deprecated, seemingly short years later...that's just wasted knowledge and time, to me. We need more experts in this (computing) world, not fewer! Yes, I am reticent about any l

Stallman is a charlatan

[paralumina01]

He couldn't hack it at MIT, so he had to steal other people's work.

misguided

[aRTeeNLCH]

Poor Leah Rowe [vimuser.org], if only she would just accept the superiority of Emacs. All kidding aside, with her stance on vi I'm sure she's discussion hardened. (Yeah, still kidding, and pining for the good old days...)

what???

[hawk]

are you saying that there *isn't* a libreboot module for EMACS???

Are you *sure*???