Re: Keep both images but stop pretending no-free is unofficial
Hakan Bayındır dijo [Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 09:21:07PM +0300]: > A further evolution of this idea might be adding another question to > Debian Installer regarding to non-free software. > > If the users choose “No” for enabling non-free repositories, another > question might ask “Your system seems to need some firmware packages > to operate correctly, do you want to enable only the firmware > packages, but not the other non-free software?” > > Normally, the installer asks for “firmware.zip” file if it can’t > continue, but it’s already noted that making it work is very very > hard (I only succeeded once in my 15 years of Debian use). Maybe > making this process easier helps? And this still does not get us all the way there -- There are many computers that can run Debian that won't even try to boot in the absence of a non-free firmware on the boot media. Yes, I'm one of the maintainers for raspi-firmware... :-/
Re: Keep both images but stop pretending no-free is unofficial
> On 21 Apr 2022, at 21:14, Gunnar Wolf wrote: > > Marc Haber dijo [Tue, Apr 19, 2022 at 06:56:54PM +0200]: >> On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 08:21:10 -0600, Sam Hartman >> wrote: >>> One valuable suggestion was to make sure users could easily select >>> freedom if that's what they wanted. >>> So I think a free installation image is important. >> >> Would that not be possible by having an image WITH firmware and an >> installer asking whether the user wants a free or a usable system? > > Up to a certain point, I guess. But users do get confused by Debian, a > stubbornly-free distribution, having multiple images –some official, > some unblessed– on different places. > > Maybe if the free image finds (important? i.e. the only connectivity > option, or required for enabling a video card beyond framebuffer?) > hardware for which firmware is required, it could display a prominent > message, suggesting the user to download the > official-but-firmware-carrying images from a simple debian.org URL. A further evolution of this idea might be adding another question to Debian Installer regarding to non-free software. If the users choose “No” for enabling non-free repositories, another question might ask “Your system seems to need some firmware packages to operate correctly, do you want to enable only the firmware packages, but not the other non-free software?” Normally, the installer asks for “firmware.zip” file if it can’t continue, but it’s already noted that making it work is very very hard (I only succeeded once in my 15 years of Debian use). Maybe making this process easier helps?
Re: Keep both images but stop pretending no-free is unofficial
Marc Haber dijo [Tue, Apr 19, 2022 at 06:56:54PM +0200]: > On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 08:21:10 -0600, Sam Hartman > wrote: > >One valuable suggestion was to make sure users could easily select > >freedom if that's what they wanted. > >So I think a free installation image is important. > > Would that not be possible by having an image WITH firmware and an > installer asking whether the user wants a free or a usable system? Up to a certain point, I guess. But users do get confused by Debian, a stubbornly-free distribution, having multiple images –some official, some unblessed– on different places. Maybe if the free image finds (important? i.e. the only connectivity option, or required for enabling a video card beyond framebuffer?) hardware for which firmware is required, it could display a prominent message, suggesting the user to download the official-but-firmware-carrying images from a simple debian.org URL.
Re: Keep both images but stop pretending no-free is unofficial
On Wed, 2022-04-20 at 19:47 +0530, Pirate Praveen wrote: > 2022, ഏപ്രിൽ 20 1:52:45 PM IST, Ansgar ൽ എഴുതി > > On Wed, 2022-04-20 at 12:55 +0530, Pirate Praveen wrote: > > > liberated.computer it is refurbished and some components like > > > wifi > > > cards replaced so it works with 100% free software. > > > > No, it doesn't. It just *hides* the fact that you use non-free > > software. If you are happy with that, fine, but please don't claim > > it > > uses 100% free software. > > So are our official images not 100% free? If so what are we even > proposing to change? > > This question was about a desire to ship libre version of the image > with a laptop that can work with that image. Someone asked if such a > laptop exist in reality and I pointed out to someone doing that > actually. No, the question was about a free OS "along with a libre(!) laptop". If "libre" means "can use non-free firmware as much as it wants (as long as this is hidden from the user)", you can just leave out the "libre" part. And even for this 10-year-old computer, some non-free firmware is still present in user-accessible parts (Intel ME). So it's not much of a change if Debian's install would ship a second one. > > And everything from keyboard, mice, storage (SD cards, SSD, > > rotating > > disks, controllers), ... has firmware. I don't expect them to have > > done > > much about that. Of course some devices come with preinstalled > > firmware, so it's easy to ignore the firmware exists. However, that > > does not "free" you from the restrictions of proprietary software > > that > > comes from using non-free firmware in any way compared to having > > the OS > > supply the firmware data. > > There are many layers of issues regarding firmware. I did not oppose > creating a non free image. I was only asking to keep creating the > free image for those who want it. > > https://forums.puri.sm/t/does-respects-your-freedom-certification-allow-updating-of-proprietary-firmware/9484/6 > > This has a pretty in depth analysis. I tend to agree with the > criteria FSF set for RYF certification relating to firmware. Yes, that is the "Of course some devices come with preinstalled firmware, so it's easy to ignore the firmware exists" approach I mentioned. That looks just like lying to oneself to me, so I don't feel it useful to consider. Other people might be fine with it. Ansgar
Re: Keep both images but stop pretending no-free is unofficial
Pirate Praveen, le mer. 20 avril 2022 19:47:31 +0530, a ecrit: > 2022, ഏപ്രിൽ 20 1:52:45 PM IST, Ansgar ൽ എഴുതി > >On Wed, 2022-04-20 at 12:55 +0530, Pirate Praveen wrote: > >> liberated.computer it is refurbished and some components like wifi > >> cards replaced so it works with 100% free software. > > > >No, it doesn't. It just *hides* the fact that you use non-free > >software. If you are happy with that, fine, but please don't claim it > >uses 100% free software. > > So are our official images not 100% free? They are. What is not is your computer, that already embeds non-free firmware when you buy it. Loading newer versions of them or not doesn't change that. Samuel
Re: Keep both images but stop pretending no-free is unofficial
2022, ഏപ്രിൽ 20 1:52:45 PM IST, Ansgar ൽ എഴുതി >On Wed, 2022-04-20 at 12:55 +0530, Pirate Praveen wrote: >> liberated.computer it is refurbished and some components like wifi >> cards replaced so it works with 100% free software. > >No, it doesn't. It just *hides* the fact that you use non-free >software. If you are happy with that, fine, but please don't claim it >uses 100% free software. So are our official images not 100% free? If so what are we even proposing to change? This question was about a desire to ship libre version of the image with a laptop that can work with that image. Someone asked if such a laptop exist in reality and I pointed out to someone doing that actually. >And everything from keyboard, mice, storage (SD cards, SSD, rotating >disks, controllers), ... has firmware. I don't expect them to have done >much about that. Of course some devices come with preinstalled >firmware, so it's easy to ignore the firmware exists. However, that >does not "free" you from the restrictions of proprietary software that >comes from using non-free firmware in any way compared to having the OS >supply the firmware data. There are many layers of issues regarding firmware. I did not oppose creating a non free image. I was only asking to keep creating the free image for those who want it. https://forums.puri.sm/t/does-respects-your-freedom-certification-allow-updating-of-proprietary-firmware/9484/6 This has a pretty in depth analysis. I tend to agree with the criteria FSF set for RYF certification relating to firmware. "The rational is that the particular bit pattern which constitutes the firmware is relatively fixed, and so is essentially hardware. Of course, just like the company need not glue the case shut to prevent the end user from using a shunt-mod to overclock the GPU, they similarly don’t have to clip off the JTAG pins to prevent the user from rearranging those bits however they like. They just must not expect the user to do so (or have software on the machine to do it for the user automatically) in order to have a correctly functioning machine." Specifically this, They just must not expect the user to do so (or have software on the machine to do it for the user automatically) in order to have a correctly functioning machine. So a person with RYF certified hardware should be a able to use an image without the proprietary firmware. As I already clarified, I just want to keep the free image option and not opposed to the separate non-free image. >Ansgar > -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
Re: Keep both images but stop pretending no-free is unofficial
On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 08:28:25AM -0400, Polyna-Maude Racicot-Summerside wrote: > I think you lack pretty much of seeing more than you own self and use case. No, everything I write in these threads I write for our potential users who don't have enough knowledge to find things they need or to dismiss propaganda. It's much easier for me to handle my own use cases. > I've used plenty of laptop without making a mess, sometime by using a > external Wifi card or simply choosing wisely. > > Now, regarding your complain on the microcode. I think it's useless to > have a conversation regarding this subject with you because having a > global view seems out of bound for your mind. > > Yes microcode are copyrighted blob. So run your computer without using > microcode update and do a change of CPU every time a potential bug is > found in a CPU. > > You know what microcode does ? If so explain to me how it could be > possible to have a CPU with microcode in the open-source without having > more risk than benefits ? Now we'd see hacking done on the CPU > micro-code itself because anyone could sign it. Dumb bell. > > You've now got your solution. What are you asking for ? We provide a OS, > we don't change the world to make it suit your need. So you've lost the context. -- WBR, wRAR signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Keep both images but stop pretending no-free is unofficial
On 2022-04-20 04:06, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote: > On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 01:25:31PM +0530, Pirate Praveen wrote: >> Similarly, I think it would be reasonable for someone to want to provide >> entirely free Debian media along with a libre laptop. > > Does this exist in the real world? Which hardware would such a system > contain? liberated.computer it is refurbished and some components like wifi cards replaced so it works with 100% free software. >>> >>> Intel Core i5-3320M CPU (dual-core, four threads, 3rd Gen) >>> >>> So no. >>> >> >> What is no here? This project don't exist or they don't want to provide a >> libre image? > Intel CPUs contain non-free microcode. Using them even implies enabling > the Debian non-free repo to get security fixes for it. > Intel GPUs reportedly don't work good enough, or at all, without non-free > firmware, according to the surveys done during the bullseye freeze. > >> Debian's free image works on these laptops and if we make only non-free >> images they won't be able to provide a fully free image. > Eh, Debian's free image works on a lot of hardware, especially when you > don't need to download anything during the install (e.g. because you use a > DVD image or don't install a GUI), the installed system, on the other > hand... > > But I agree that technically it's fine "to provide entirely free Debian > media along with a libre laptop" in this case. > I think you lack pretty much of seeing more than you own self and use case. I've used plenty of laptop without making a mess, sometime by using a external Wifi card or simply choosing wisely. Now, regarding your complain on the microcode. I think it's useless to have a conversation regarding this subject with you because having a global view seems out of bound for your mind. Yes microcode are copyrighted blob. So run your computer without using microcode update and do a change of CPU every time a potential bug is found in a CPU. You know what microcode does ? If so explain to me how it could be possible to have a CPU with microcode in the open-source without having more risk than benefits ? Now we'd see hacking done on the CPU micro-code itself because anyone could sign it. Dumb bell. You've now got your solution. What are you asking for ? We provide a OS, we don't change the world to make it suit your need. -- Polyna-Maude R.-Summerside -Be smart, Be wise, Support opensource development
Re: Keep both images but stop pretending no-free is unofficial
On Wed, 2022-04-20 at 12:55 +0530, Pirate Praveen wrote: > liberated.computer it is refurbished and some components like wifi > cards replaced so it works with 100% free software. No, it doesn't. It just *hides* the fact that you use non-free software. If you are happy with that, fine, but please don't claim it uses 100% free software. And everything from keyboard, mice, storage (SD cards, SSD, rotating disks, controllers), ... has firmware. I don't expect them to have done much about that. Of course some devices come with preinstalled firmware, so it's easy to ignore the firmware exists. However, that does not "free" you from the restrictions of proprietary software that comes from using non-free firmware in any way compared to having the OS supply the firmware data. Ansgar
Re: Keep both images but stop pretending no-free is unofficial
On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 01:25:31PM +0530, Pirate Praveen wrote: > >> >> Similarly, I think it would be reasonable for someone to want to provide > >> >> entirely free Debian media along with a libre laptop. > >> > > >> >Does this exist in the real world? Which hardware would such a system > >> >contain? > >> > >> liberated.computer it is refurbished and some components like wifi cards > >> replaced so it works with 100% free software. > > > >Intel Core i5-3320M CPU (dual-core, four threads, 3rd Gen) > > > >So no. > > > > What is no here? This project don't exist or they don't want to provide a > libre image? Intel CPUs contain non-free microcode. Using them even implies enabling the Debian non-free repo to get security fixes for it. Intel GPUs reportedly don't work good enough, or at all, without non-free firmware, according to the surveys done during the bullseye freeze. > Debian's free image works on these laptops and if we make only non-free > images they won't be able to provide a fully free image. Eh, Debian's free image works on a lot of hardware, especially when you don't need to download anything during the install (e.g. because you use a DVD image or don't install a GUI), the installed system, on the other hand... But I agree that technically it's fine "to provide entirely free Debian media along with a libre laptop" in this case. -- WBR, wRAR signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Keep both images but stop pretending no-free is unofficial
2022, ഏപ്രിൽ 20 1:14:14 PM IST, Andrey Rahmatullin ൽ എഴുതി >On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 12:55:44PM +0530, Pirate Praveen wrote: >> >> Similarly, I think it would be reasonable for someone to want to provide >> >> entirely free Debian media along with a libre laptop. >> > >> >Does this exist in the real world? Which hardware would such a system >> >contain? >> >> liberated.computer it is refurbished and some components like wifi cards >> replaced so it works with 100% free software. > >Intel Core i5-3320M CPU (dual-core, four threads, 3rd Gen) > >So no. > What is no here? This project don't exist or they don't want to provide a libre image? Debian's free image works on these laptops and if we make only non-free images they won't be able to provide a fully free image. -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
Re: Keep both images but stop pretending no-free is unofficial
On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 12:55:44PM +0530, Pirate Praveen wrote: > >> Similarly, I think it would be reasonable for someone to want to provide > >> entirely free Debian media along with a libre laptop. > > > >Does this exist in the real world? Which hardware would such a system > >contain? > > liberated.computer it is refurbished and some components like wifi cards > replaced so it works with 100% free software. Intel Core i5-3320M CPU (dual-core, four threads, 3rd Gen) So no. -- WBR, wRAR signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Keep both images but stop pretending no-free is unofficial
2022, ഏപ്രിൽ 20 2:19:21 AM IST, Bastian Blank ൽ എഴുതി >> Similarly, I think it would be reasonable for someone to want to provide >> entirely free Debian media along with a libre laptop. > >Does this exist in the real world? Which hardware would such a system >contain? liberated.computer it is refurbished and some components like wifi cards replaced so it works with 100% free software. -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
Re: Keep both images but stop pretending no-free is unofficial
Hi Sam On Tue, Apr 19, 2022 at 02:05:20PM -0600, Sam Hartman wrote: > Marc> Would that not be possible by having an image WITH firmware > Marc> and an installer asking whether the user wants a free or a > Marc> usable system? > For example I would thinki it would be entirely reasonable for someone > to want to include a version of Debian installer for use with qemu in an > environment that needed to be DFSG free. Can you provide us a copy of the request for it? > Similarly, I think it would be reasonable for someone to want to provide > entirely free Debian media along with a libre laptop. Does this exist in the real world? Which hardware would such a system contain? > If providing an image that includes but does not use non-free components > is acceptable for our users, we could save ourselves a lot of time and > complexity by not repacking sources that include non-dfsg components. > We could just not use those components at least when targeting main for > binaries. Sorry, but why can't you stay on topic? We where talking about firmware, not random non-free stuff. Bastian -- No one wants war. -- Kirk, "Errand of Mercy", stardate 3201.7
Re: Keep both images but stop pretending no-free is unofficial
On Apr 19, Sam Hartman wrote: > For example I would thinki it would be entirely reasonable for someone > to want to include a version of Debian installer for use with qemu in an > environment that needed to be DFSG free. > Similarly, I think it would be reasonable for someone to want to provide > entirely free Debian media along with a libre laptop. While I do not expect that this is a significant use case I think that it would be an acceptable compromise to ask the CD team to continue producing both image sets for another one or two releases and then evaluate how much the totally-free images will actually have been downloaded. -- ciao, Marco signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Keep both images but stop pretending no-free is unofficial
> "Marc" == Marc Haber writes: Marc> On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 08:21:10 -0600, Sam Hartman Marc> Marc> wrote: >> One valuable suggestion was to make sure users could easily >> select freedom if that's what they wanted. So I think a free >> installation image is important. Marc> Would that not be possible by having an image WITH firmware Marc> and an installer asking whether the user wants a free or a Marc> usable system? No, not really. Imagine that you have some constraint like the DFSG for media that you distribute. An image that asks whether you want to install non-free firmware included in the image is by definition not DFSG-free, and so you could not distributie it in such an environment. For example I would thinki it would be entirely reasonable for someone to want to include a version of Debian installer for use with qemu in an environment that needed to be DFSG free. Similarly, I think it would be reasonable for someone to want to provide entirely free Debian media along with a libre laptop. If providing an image that includes but does not use non-free components is acceptable for our users, we could save ourselves a lot of time and complexity by not repacking sources that include non-dfsg components. We could just not use those components at least when targeting main for binaries. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Keep both images but stop pretending no-free is unofficial
On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 08:21:10 -0600, Sam Hartman wrote: >One valuable suggestion was to make sure users could easily select >freedom if that's what they wanted. >So I think a free installation image is important. Would that not be possible by having an image WITH firmware and an installer asking whether the user wants a free or a usable system? Greetings Marc -- -- !! No courtesy copies, please !! - Marc Haber | " Questions are the | Mailadresse im Header Mannheim, Germany | Beginning of Wisdom " | Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG "Rightful Heir" | Fon: *49 621 72739834
Keep both images but stop pretending no-free is unofficial
Steve> 3. We could stop pretending that the non-free images are Steve> unofficial, and maybe move them alongside the normal free Steve> images so they're published together. This would make them Steve> easier to find for people that need them, but is likely to Steve> cause users to question why we still make any images without Steve> firmware if they're otherwise identical. TL;DR: Because I think promoting discussion about free software is valuable, because I think a subset of our users care about fully free media, and because I think the archive split is unnecessary and divisive I support this option. Steve, I think I strongly prefer this option for a number of reasons: First, the ideological questions are important to who we are. I actually think having our users ask these questions can be valuable provided that we can answer them in ways that are not confusing. Some of our users care deeply about being able to get a free system, and I think it's valuable to support them. I remember a discussion with John Sullivan at DebConf. He was talking how Debian didn't do a great job of meeting the needs of freedom-focused users. After I started talking to John about what that might look like; I cannot remember how much of our conversation was public and how much was on the hallway track. I pointed out that Debian was unlikely to remove non-free firmware support from the installer and asked what we could do to make things better without making them worse for other users. One valuable suggestion was to make sure users could easily select freedom if that's what they wanted. So I think a free installation image is important. It's even useful for qemu, for people like Purism, and the like. Choosing this approach avoids deciding how to split the archive. I actually think that split will be divisive and since I think it is unnecessary given the above I'd rather avoid it. So How Could it Work = First, within the project, Debian remains 100% free. We produce two images. One is just Debian. One is Debian plus other things. I don't think that's the best way to market things to our users, but I do think that's the best way for us to think about it internally. Externally, I think the trick is to come up with labels to help our users understand what is going on. Things like Debian Hardware Enablement Debian with Hardware Support Debian Plus For the free image Pure Debian Debian Libre Deb ian Building Block I also think that we need to bite the bullet and explicitly say that for most users, the non-free image is preferred. We also need to make the non-free image significantly more prominent than the free image. I think we can have a link to a FAQ discussing the issues, but we need to get to a place where what the average user finds is the non-free image. So, I do think we'll need a GR because we will never get consensus on that. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
