On Wed, 1 Jun 2022 15:21:01 +, "Andrew M.A. Cater"
wrote:
>Basic tasks include networking - many IBM and Dell servers use(d) Broadcom
>chipsets which wouldn't work without a non-free driver. Been caught out like
>that installing in a data centre: can't get networking to work to get the
>drive
Hi Hakan,
On Wed, Jun 01, 2022 at 09:41:35AM +0300, Hakan Bayındır wrote:
>
>
> On 30.05.2022 09:36, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
> > On Sun, May 29, 2022 at 05:33:21PM -0400, Bobby wrote:
> > > There are definitely people who use forks because it's easier to
> > > install non-free firmware. What's
On 1.06.2022 14:33, Marc Haber wrote:
On Wed, 1 Jun 2022 09:41:35 +0300, Hakan Bay?nd?r
wrote:
As a person who's handling a lot of servers, I can tell that most high
performance hardware is running either load-on-boot (generally ethernet
and other network cards) or persistent (generally stor
On Wed, 1 Jun 2022 09:41:35 +0300, Hakan Bay?nd?r
wrote:
>As a person who's handling a lot of servers, I can tell that most high
>performance hardware is running either load-on-boot (generally ethernet
>and other network cards) or persistent (generally storage and RAID
>contollers) non-free fir
On 30.05.2022 09:36, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
On Sun, May 29, 2022 at 05:33:21PM -0400, Bobby wrote:
There are definitely people who use forks because it's easier to
install non-free firmware. What's the problem with that? Let them use
forks. A distro can't be all things to all people.
This
On Sun, May 29, 2022 at 05:33:21PM -0400, Bobby wrote:
> There are definitely people who use forks because it's easier to
> install non-free firmware. What's the problem with that? Let them use
> forks. A distro can't be all things to all people.
This would mean almost officially dropping support
On May 29, 2022, at 6:40 PM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
>On Sun, May 29, 2022 at 05:33:21PM -0400, Bobby wrote: > FWIW, as a 10+ years
>user (first time caller :p) I strongly support > sticking with the status quo.
>There are plenty of systems that don't > require firmware to work, and often
>when
On Sun, May 29, 2022 at 05:33:21PM -0400, Bobby wrote:
> FWIW, as a 10+ years user (first time caller :p) I strongly support
> sticking with the status quo. There are plenty of systems that don't
> require firmware to work, and often when people say it doesn't "work"
> they really mean that its fun
FWIW, as a 10+ years user (first time caller :p) I strongly support
sticking with the status quo. There are plenty of systems that don't
require firmware to work, and often when people say it doesn't "work"
they really mean that its functionality is more limited. I use Debian
specifically because i
Hi Steve et al,
On Tue, Apr 19, 2022 at 01:27:46AM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> TL;DR: firmware support in Debian sucks, and we need to change this. See the
> "My preference, and rationale" Section below.
Thank you for the excellent write-up.
> 5. We could split out the non-free firmware pack
Thanks for starting this conversation!
> 5. We could split out the non-free firmware packages into a new
> non-free-firmware component in the archive, and allow a specific
exception
> only to allow inclusion of those packages on our official media.
We would
> then generate only on
On Tue, 2022-04-26 at 20:41 +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> secure boot signing process at Microsoft is a review-sign process
What kind of review are Microsoft doing of the Debian shim?
Are they reviewing the source and checking for a reproducible build?
--
bye,
pabs
https://wiki.debian.org/Pau
Moin
On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 04:14:02PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Sat, 23 Apr 2022 18:21:47 +0100, Steve McIntyre
> wrote:
> >We don't have good docs around this in general (hey, it's security
> >software - it's against the law to write good and complete docs!), but
> >I've certainly discusse
Marc Haber wrote:
>On Sat, 23 Apr 2022 18:21:47 +0100, Steve McIntyre
>
>>Better than that, our shim-signed source package always double-checks
>>things here. At build time it removes the Microsoft signature and
>>compares that shim binary to the binary that we submitted for
>>signing. We would sp
On Tue, 2022-04-26 at 16:04 +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Sat, 23 Apr 2022 13:54:59 +0200, Ansgar wrote:
> > Why?
>
> If only I knew. I myself don't feel to comfortable to rely on
> Microsoft being able to pull the plug on us any time. I don't know
> whether they can, but I imagine some kind of r
On Sat, 23 Apr 2022 18:21:47 +0100, Steve McIntyre
wrote:
>We don't have good docs around this in general (hey, it's security
>software - it's against the law to write good and complete docs!), but
>I've certainly discussed this with a few folks over the years.
It would be great to have that writ
On Sat, 23 Apr 2022 13:54:59 +0200, Ansgar wrote:
>On Sat, 2022-04-23 at 12:21 +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
>> >Is the presence of shim-signed on the install media enough to make
>> >people feel somehow contaminated?
>>
>> I think so, yes. Personally, I don't care too much but i can
>> understand why
Dear developers,
if like to here an opinion from the useer side, please listen.
I made many installations of debian in the last years, mostly notebooks
preinstalled with windows. What often lacks is, that on many newer notebooks
the network card is not accessible. Either due of missing firmware
On 4/26/22 12:08, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 11:59:20AM +0300, Hakan Bayındır wrote:
No, they do not. Most popular devices won't work at all without non-
free firmware, including boring things such as mass storage (SD cards,
SSD, HDD, ..., and controllers), input device
On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 11:59:20AM +0300, Hakan Bayındır wrote:
> > No, they do not. Most popular devices won't work at all without non-
> > free firmware, including boring things such as mass storage (SD cards,
> > SSD, HDD, ..., and controllers), input devices (keyboards, mice, ...).
>
> Yeah, y
> On 26 Apr 2022, at 11:30, Ansgar wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2022-04-26 at 10:47 +0300, Hakan Bayındır wrote:
>> While I understand where you're coming from, I don't think such thing
>> is necessary, because a) Most popular devices with non-free firmware
>> blobs already work without such firmware
>
On Tue, 2022-04-26 at 10:47 +0300, Hakan Bayındır wrote:
> While I understand where you're coming from, I don't think such thing
> is necessary, because a) Most popular devices with non-free firmware
> blobs already work without such firmware
No, they do not. Most popular devices won't work at al
On 4/26/22 09:12, Ansgar wrote:
On Mon, 2022-04-25 at 23:48 +0300, Hakan Bayındır wrote:
While what you’re saying is technically true, the default selection
means much more than a default. It’s defines the stance of Debian, as
a whole.
[...]
So, if Option 5 is adopted, the default state is
On Mon, 2022-04-25 at 23:48 +0300, Hakan Bayındır wrote:
> While what you’re saying is technically true, the default selection
> means much more than a default. It’s defines the stance of Debian, as
> a whole.
[...]
> So, if Option 5 is adopted, the default state is as important as the
> step itsel
> On 25 Apr 2022, at 19:40, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 05:53:03PM +0200, Paul van der Vlis wrote:
>> I have an idea for an extra option:
>>
>> 6. Put the closed source firmware somewhere in the Debian images, but
>> never
>> install closed sourc
On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 05:53:03PM +0200, Paul van der Vlis wrote:
> > > > > I have an idea for an extra option:
> > > > >
> > > > > 6. Put the closed source firmware somewhere in the Debian images, but
> > > > > never
> > > > > install closed source firmware by default. "No" should be the defaul
Op 23-04-2022 om 23:30 schreef Andrey Rahmatullin:
On Sat, Apr 23, 2022 at 10:48:03PM +0200, Paul van der Vlis wrote:
I have an idea for an extra option:
6. Put the closed source firmware somewhere in the Debian images, but never
install closed source firmware by default. "No" should be the def
On Sun, 2022-04-24 at 00:23 +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> Steven Robbins wrote:
> >
> > Luca Boccassi wrote:
> >
> > > Personally, I'd even go for option 4, so that other drivers are covered
> > > too (the general advice that can be found on the internet for users
> > > with nvidia hardware seem
> My background is as a longtime debian user and support volunteer in #debian.
Thanks for doing that! I haven't been on that channel for a while, but I do
remember what an incredible help you've been to many there :)
Apologies for my harsh wording wrt auto-download. I shouldn't have have put my
On Sun, Apr 24, 2022 at 05:03:29AM +0200, Simon Richter wrote:
> > Making Debian hard to use is a very short-sighted view of how to promote
> > free software - it works in the very short term only.
>
> The same applies in the other direction -- making no real distinction
> between free and non-fre
Hi,
On 4/23/22 11:07 PM, Iustin Pop wrote:
Making Debian hard to use is a very short-sighted view of how to promote
free software - it works in the very short term only.
The same applies in the other direction -- making no real distinction
between free and non-free software is a short term s
On Sat, 2022-04-23 at 18:21 +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> If you don't like the fact that Microsoft's keys are involved,
> it's possible on a lot of machines to enrol your own keys
On machines where this isn't possible in the UEFI firmware interface,
IIRC shim-signed is designed to allow you to
Steven Robbins wrote:
>
>Luca Boccassi wrote:
>
>> Personally, I'd even go for option 4, so that other drivers are covered
>> too (the general advice that can be found on the internet for users
>> with nvidia hardware seems to be: "avoid Debian, go Ubuntu/Mint/etc",
>> which is just a sad state of
On Sat, Apr 23, 2022 at 10:48:03PM +0200, Paul van der Vlis wrote:
> > > I have an idea for an extra option:
> > >
> > > 6. Put the closed source firmware somewhere in the Debian images, but
> > > never
> > > install closed source firmware by default. "No" should be the default.
> > That's the op
On Sat, Apr 23, 2022 at 4:50 PM Paul van der Vlis
wrote:
> Op 23-04-2022 om 16:10 schreef Andrey Rahmatullin:
> > On Sat, Apr 23, 2022 at 03:13:29PM +0200, Paul van der Vlis wrote:
> >>> I see several possible options that the images team can choose from
> here.
> >>> However, several of these op
On 2022-04-23 22:48:03, Paul van der Vlis wrote:
> Op 23-04-2022 om 16:10 schreef Andrey Rahmatullin:
> > On Sat, Apr 23, 2022 at 03:13:29PM +0200, Paul van der Vlis wrote:
> > > > I see several possible options that the images team can choose from
> > > > here.
> > > > However, several of these o
Op 23-04-2022 om 16:10 schreef Andrey Rahmatullin:
On Sat, Apr 23, 2022 at 03:13:29PM +0200, Paul van der Vlis wrote:
I see several possible options that the images team can choose from here.
However, several of these options could undermine the principles of Debian. We
don't want to make fundam
Luca Boccassi wrote:
> Personally, I'd even go for option 4, so that other drivers are covered
> too (the general advice that can be found on the internet for users
> with nvidia hardware seems to be: "avoid Debian, go Ubuntu/Mint/etc",
> which is just a sad state of affairs). But option 5 is alre
Marc Haber wrote:
>On Fri, 22 Apr 2022 11:16:42 +0200, Philip Hands
>wrote:
>>I understand the urge to insist upon absolute DFSG purity in the media
>>we produce, but when it comes to wanting to avoid every last shred of
>>data that we could not regenerate ourselves, I think we crossed that
>>line
On Sat, Apr 23, 2022 at 03:13:29PM +0200, Paul van der Vlis wrote:
> > I see several possible options that the images team can choose from here.
> > However, several of these options could undermine the principles of Debian.
> > We
> > don't want to make fundamental changes like that without the c
Op 19-04-2022 om 02:30 schreef Steve McIntyre:
I see several possible options that the images team can choose from here.
However, several of these options could undermine the principles of Debian. We
don't want to make fundamental changes like that without the clear backing of
the wider project.
On Sat, 2022-04-23 at 12:21 +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> >Is the presence of shim-signed on the install media enough to make
> >people feel somehow contaminated?
>
> I think so, yes. Personally, I don't care too much but i can
> understand why some people might.
Why? Because it contains a third-part
On Fri, 22 Apr 2022 11:16:42 +0200, Philip Hands
wrote:
>I understand the urge to insist upon absolute DFSG purity in the media
>we produce, but when it comes to wanting to avoid every last shred of
>data that we could not regenerate ourselves, I think we crossed that
>line some time ago.
>
>I'm t
On Thu, 21 Apr 2022 10:12:19 -0700, Russ Allbery
wrote:
>I've been a Debian Developer for quite some time and can usually manage to
>figure out most tasks like this, and providing separate firmware to the
>installer has completely defeated me every time I've tried it. I've spent
>frustrated hours
On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 10:52:04AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> I agree with this option split, but that reminds me of a different
> procedural note.
>
> While I recognize and respect the desire to create a comprehensive ballot,
> I'm still going to advocate for proposing a GR only with the option
hi Steve,
On Tue, Apr 19, 2022 at 01:27:46AM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> TL;DR: firmware support in Debian sucks, and we need to change this. See the
> "My preference, and rationale" Section below.
[...]
and anyone involved, especillay including those not listed here:
> Thanks to people who r
Leandro Cunha writes:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2022 at 9:28 PM Steve McIntyre wrote:
>>
>> TL;DR: firmware support in Debian sucks, and we need to change this. See the
>> "My preference, and rationale" Section below.
>>
>> In my opinion, the way we deal with (non-free) firmware in Debian is a m
Am 22. April 2022 07:18:50 MESZ schrieb Andreas Tille :
>Am Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 10:12:19AM -0700 schrieb Russ Allbery:
>>
>> I've been a Debian Developer for quite some time and can usually manage to
>> figure out most tasks like this, and providing separate firmware to the
>> installer has compl
On 4/22/22 08:18, Andreas Tille wrote:
Am Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 10:12:19AM -0700 schrieb Russ Allbery:
I've been a Debian Developer for quite some time and can usually manage to
figure out most tasks like this, and providing separate firmware to the
installer has completely defeated me every
Am Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 10:12:19AM -0700 schrieb Russ Allbery:
>
> I've been a Debian Developer for quite some time and can usually manage to
> figure out most tasks like this, and providing separate firmware to the
> installer has completely defeated me every time I've tried it. I've spent
> fru
Hi,
On Mon, Apr 18, 2022 at 9:28 PM Steve McIntyre wrote:
>
> TL;DR: firmware support in Debian sucks, and we need to change this. See the
> "My preference, and rationale" Section below.
>
> In my opinion, the way we deal with (non-free) firmware in Debian is a mess,
> and this is hurting many of
Hi Everyone,
On Thu, 2022-04-21 at 13:52 +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
>After some discussion on #debian-www with sney (author of the current
>auto-download page)
I'm not a voting member of this organization, but since I'm mentioned by name, I
thought I would share my 0.02, if you'll have them. My bac
Hi,
On 4/20/22 12:14 PM, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
However I think we should continue to produce install media without
non-free components, at least for a period of time after making the
switch (as another reply said, perhaps 1-2 releases and review). It
feels like me too big a step to take to st
Steve McIntyre wrote:
> What would I choose to do? My personal preference would be to go with optiob
> 5:
> split the non-free firmware into a special new component and include that on
> official media.
I fully agree with that (as mentioned before when the discussion came up).
I also believe we c
Hakan Bayındır writes:
> As everybody knows, Debian is also releasing the said firmware as
> compressed archives and these are visible in the download page [0],
> however usage and documentation is neither clearly documented, nor easy
> for the beginners or casual users.
> Considering most users
On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 01:39:39PM +0300, Hakan Bayındır wrote:
> > > > > As everybody knows, Debian is also releasing the said firmware as
> > > > > compressed
> > > > > archives and these are visible in the download page [0], however
> > > > > usage and
> > > > > documentation is neither clearl
Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
>
>On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 12:53:46PM -0500, Devin Prater wrote:
>> But back on topic, would the nonfree DVD ISO's have more firmware on them
>> than the CD version? Or is that just for offline installs?
>As far as I understand it there is just one set of non-free firmware
Russ Allbery wrote:
>Steve McIntyre writes:
>
>> Thanks! That's a really good question, and one that we should also
>> include on the GR. I'd split my option 5 into two:
>
>> 5. Include non-free firmware but do not enable it by default
>> 6. Include non-free firmware and enable it by default
>
>>
On 4/21/22 11:09, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 10:57:47AM +0300, Hakan Bayındır wrote:
As everybody knows, Debian is also releasing the said firmware as compressed
archives and these are visible in the download page [0], however usage and
documentation is neither clearly doc
On Thu, 2022-04-21 at 11:12 +0200, Mattias Wadenstein wrote:
> For free software reasons, I believe that Debian should encourage this
> method of distribution too, because it opens up the option for free
> firmware to be developed as replacement for the non-free ones (or
> encouraging vendors t
Sorry for duplicate - It was from a wrong account. Re sending just to
ensure delivery.
---
Dear All and Steve,
I'm kinda late to the discussion, but upon reading the message, a
possible solution has been popped into my mind.
As everybody knows, Debian is also releasing the said firmware as
On Tue, 19 Apr 2022, Steve McIntyre wrote:
TL;DR: firmware support in Debian sucks, and we need to change this. See the
"My preference, and rationale" Section below.
Agree.
In times past, all necessary firmware would normally be included directly in
devices / expansion cards by their vendors
On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 10:57:47AM +0300, Hakan Bayındır wrote:
> > > As everybody knows, Debian is also releasing the said firmware as
> > > compressed
> > > archives and these are visible in the download page [0], however usage and
> > > documentation is neither clearly documented, nor easy for
Hi Andrey,
On 4/21/22 10:50, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 09:57:36AM +0300, Hakan Bayındır wrote:
As everybody knows, Debian is also releasing the said firmware as compressed
archives and these are visible in the download page [0], however usage and
documentation is neither
On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 09:57:36AM +0300, Hakan Bayındır wrote:
> As everybody knows, Debian is also releasing the said firmware as compressed
> archives and these are visible in the download page [0], however usage and
> documentation is neither clearly documented, nor easy for the beginners or
>
On 4/19/22 02:27, Steve McIntyre wrote:
TL;DR: firmware support in Debian sucks, and we need to change this. See the
"My preference, and rationale" Section below.
Hi Steve,
Thanks a lot for this proposal.
Like many, I agree with your option 5. In many installation (especially
the so-many ser
Dear All and Steve,
I'm kinda late to the discussion, but upon reading the message, a
possible solution has been popped into my mind.
As everybody knows, Debian is also releasing the said firmware as
compressed archives and these are visible in the download page [0],
however usage and docume
On Wed, 2022-04-20 at 15:32 +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> what other support Debian could give to libre/open firmware projects.
Some ideas for this:
We could package the libre/open firmware projects that are missing.
We could lobby hardware vendors to release their existing proprietary
firmware and
On Tue, 2022-04-19 at 01:27 +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> TL;DR: firmware support in Debian sucks, and we need to change this.
After some discussion on #debian-www with sney (author of the
current auto-download page) and larjona (web team), my preferred
solution to this issue looks somewhat like
> "Russ" == Russ Allbery writes:
Russ> I agree with this option split, but that reminds me of a
Russ> different procedural note.
Russ> While I recognize and respect the desire to create a
Russ> comprehensive ballot, I'm still going to advocate for
Russ> proposing a GR onl
The Debian Social Contract begins with "Debian will remain 100% free".
Changing that is a pretty big deal. Debian's principled stance on free
software has been one of the main reasons I've been using it for almost
a decade. I really appreciate the peace of mind of knowing that the
system is 100%
Thanks for starting this discussion, Steve, I appreciate the care you've put
into laying out the options.
On Tue, Apr 19, 2022 at 01:27:46AM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> 3. We could stop pretending that the non-free images are unofficial, and
> maybe move them alongside the normal free ima
On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 12:53:46PM -0500, Devin Prater wrote:
> But back on topic, would the nonfree DVD ISO's have more firmware on them
> than the CD version? Or is that just for offline installs?
As far as I understand it there is just one set of non-free firmware for
including in the ISOs and s
Sorry, that was rather strongly worded. Although, I think if we just keep
accessibility in mind, from the desktop environment to the boot process,
Debian is already far beyond other distros. Arch comes close, but one has
to know when the boot process begins in order to press Down arrow then
Enter t
Steve McIntyre writes:
> Thanks! That's a really good question, and one that we should also
> include on the GR. I'd split my option 5 into two:
> 5. Include non-free firmware but do not enable it by default
> 6. Include non-free firmware and enable it by default
> In either case, we'd make the
On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 05:04:13AM -0500, Devin Prater wrote:
> So then, I found the Non-free section and got the CD version? I guess
> that's what I should have gotten? The DVD one is the live environment
> right? See how confusion this can be?
Yes, the variety of our ISOs and the poor way they a
Hey Ansgar!
Ansgar wrote:
>On Wed, 2022-04-20 at 17:11 +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>> > Russ Allbery wrote:
>> > 1. Purely free installation.
>[ Other options ]
>> > 4. Enable non-free firmware and enable normal upgrades, [...]
>[...]
>> Now, the *default* is going to be the hard choice for us to
On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 09:51:01AM -0500, Devin Prater wrote:
> Anyways, if we want to gatekeep Debian, then fine.
The person you're replying to is not a member of the Debian Project and does
not speak for us.
We are not all accessibility experts, but Debian as a community has always
supported th
Hi Steve,
On Wed, 2022-04-20 at 17:11 +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> > Russ Allbery wrote:
> > 1. Purely free installation.
[ Other options ]
> > 4. Enable non-free firmware and enable normal upgrades, [...]
[...]
> Now, the *default* is going to be the hard choice for us to make.
Do you think th
Russ Allbery wrote:
>Jonas Smedegaard writes:
>
>In other words, rather than having to do what one does now and choose
>between the free installer and the non-free installer, my understanding of
>option #5 is that there would be one install image, but there could then
>be a prompt asking you wheth
Paul Wise wrote:
>
>On Tue, 2022-04-19 at 01:27 +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>
>> There are a number of issues here that make developers and users unhappy:
>
>There are a couple more issues related to unredistributable firmware:
Oh, I'm quite sure there are more than that even! :-)
>Some firmware
Hi Polyna-Maude,
Polyna-Maude R.-Summerside wrote:
>bwt !
>1st I've always saw Debian having brltty support from the start
>2nd Just install the firmware instruction here and your problem will be
>solved.
>https://wiki.debian.org/Firmware
>
>Stop blaiming other people when the problem is a lack of
Jeremy Stanley wrote:
>On 2022-04-19 01:27:46 +0100 (+0100), Steve McIntyre wrote:
>[...]
>> Along with adding non-free firmware onto media, when the installer
>> (or live image) runs, we should make it clear exactly which
>> firmware packages have been used/installed to support detected
>> hardw
Oh, so that's the kind of person you are. Good. I can dismiss your cranky
attitude then. Okay, so the common way of doing this *is* to put a blank
space between paragraphis then? I was told otherwise, but I'm so used to
working with Markdown that I still do it. I just thought I'd make things
look l
On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 09:07:47AM -0400, Polyna-Maude Racicot-Summerside wrote:
When you talk or read a text out loud, you make pauses ?
Why wouldn't they apply then you write a text ?
Are we again in the world of "Everyone must adapt because I'm different" ?
We ain't gonna go back to this WOKE
Polyna-Maude Racicot-Summerside, le mer. 20 avril 2022 09:07:47 -0400, a ecrit:
> On 2022-04-20 08:39, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > Polyna-Maude Racicot-Summerside, le mer. 20 avril 2022 08:32:13 -0400, a
> > ecrit:
> >> Answer bellow this awful piece of text from someone who doesn't know how
> >> t
Hi,
On 2022-04-20 08:39, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Polyna-Maude Racicot-Summerside, le mer. 20 avril 2022 08:32:13 -0400, a
> ecrit:
>> Answer bellow this awful piece of text from someone who doesn't know how
>> to make a space between line.
>
> For information, reading mails with a s
Hello,
Polyna-Maude Racicot-Summerside, le mer. 20 avril 2022 08:32:13 -0400, a ecrit:
> Answer bellow this awful piece of text from someone who doesn't know how
> to make a space between line.
For information, reading mails with a speech synthesis doesn't
necessarily render spaces between lines.
On Tue, 2022-04-19 at 01:27 +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> There are a number of issues here that make developers and users unhappy:
There are a couple more issues related to unredistributable firmware:
Some firmware is only available in the operating system preinstalled on
the device and needs
bwt !
1st I've always saw Debian having brltty support from the start
2nd Just install the firmware instruction here and your problem will be
solved.
https://wiki.debian.org/Firmware
Stop blaiming other people when the problem is a lack of research on
your part and expectation all work "out of the
Answer bellow this awful piece of text from someone who doesn't know how
to make a space between line.
On 2022-04-20 06:04, Devin Prater wrote:
> I recently tried to install Debian onto my new laptop. It's an HP
> Pavilian (can't remember the exact model sorry) with an AMD Rizon 5500
> processor w
On 19/4/22 10:27, Steve McIntyre wrote:
5. We could split out the non-free firmware packages into a new
non-free-firmware component in the archive, and allow a specific exception
only to allow inclusion of those packages on our official media. We would
then generate only one set
Hi Steve,
Thank you for raising this issue and writing about it so clearly.
On Tue, Apr 19, 2022 at 01:27:46AM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
5. We could split out the non-free firmware packages into a new
non-free-firmware component in the archive, and allow a specific
exception only to al
On Tue, Apr 19, 2022 at 01:43:39PM +0200, Christian Kastner wrote:
In case my own wasn't clear, what I meant was: (a) all of the x86_64
hosts in our infrastructure use CPUs that utilize non-free microcode,
and (b) unless we're crazy, those hosts also use the non-free
intel-microcode or amd64-micr
I recently tried to install Debian onto my new laptop. It's an HP
Pavilian (can't remember the exact model sorry) with an AMD Rizon 5500
processor with integrated Radion graphic. All seemed to work well, until I
came to the detecting Internet stage of the install. It couldn't detect my
Wi-fi card.
Quoting Russ Allbery (2022-04-19 23:57:21)
> Jonas Smedegaard writes:
> > Quoting Russ Allbery (2022-04-19 19:29:09)
>
> >> We need some way to clearly label non-free firmware packages so
> >> that you can apply whatever installation or upgrade policy locally
> >> that you want to apply, but so
2022, ഏപ്രിൽ 19 5:57:46 AM IST, Steve McIntyre ൽ എഴുതി
>This tension extends to our installation and live media. As non-free is
>officially not considered part of Debian, our official media cannot include
>anything from non-free. This has been a deliberate policy for many years.
>Instead, we hav
On Tue, 2022-04-19 at 01:27 +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> We have a small set of Free firmware binaries included in Debian main, and
> these are included on our installation and live media. This is great - we all
> love Free Software and this works.
There is a list of libre firmware projects on
On Tue, 2022-04-19 at 11:33 +0200, Christian Kastner wrote:
> Here's a somewhat radical idea: I propose that we make option (1) and
> (2) conditional on all Debian infra switching to hardware entirely free
> of binary firmware/microcode blobs.
>
> Because if *we* can't do it, then imposing this s
On Tue, Apr 19, 2022 at 11:00:23PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > > > > > > When I install systems, I consider non-free blobs more risky
> > > > > > > than other code.
> > > > > > Do you consider loadable non-free blobs more risky than their
> > > > > > older versions soldered onto the hardwa
1 - 100 of 134 matches
Mail list logo
