@charlie_root >Armbian w/ Debian 11 userland and it's very open and free.
Too bad Debian unstable (and eventually stable) is no longer optionally free (as previously), as all the installers have proprietary software in them.

>it's booting firmware is all open these day
Ideally SoC's should just use u-boot for init and everything, which would make booting free, as u-boot is meant to be GPLv2 licensed, but things are going backwards, rather than forwards.

These days the SoC vendors are getting more and more brazen in putting proprietary software blobs everywhere and/or infringing u-boots license and then calling such proprietary mess "open".

Of course everyone just believes them rather than just taking a quick look at the mess and then realizing that it's proprietary!

>the ARM trusted firmware use MIT licence, but not so bad in my opinion
The reason the pushover MIT expat license was used was so some parts could be released in source form and other parts as proprietary software (look here's some source code, it's "open", never mind the proprietary malware).

The intention of the "trusted firmware" really to restrict the user with digital handcuffs, although it's possible to use it without the handcuffs - but it's not designed for that really.

>thanks to the +JESUSISLORD license.
Requiring the modification of the LICENSE file is a terrible clause as such will cause severe license proliferation for no good reason (a standard license should be used rather than writing a new one every 5 minutes, so automated tools can determine what license your software has - as it's a pain in the ass having to check 200 different variants of expat or BSD-3 clause and determining if the trivial changes make the software proprietary or not).

Such terms are also not compatible with the GPLv3, as: "Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies of this icense document, but changing it is not allowed."

I guess it can be worked around by not having a LICENSE file and having a COPYING file instead, but I'd prefer not to really.

I'd most likely just not use software under such poor license.