Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I Love Arch, but GNU Guix Is My New Distro

boilingsteam.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 318 posts

Re: I Love Arch, but GNU Guix Is My New Distro

#241

Post by medo-bear »

alexvoda wrote: post #237
medo-bear wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I read this entire thread and wholeheartedly agree with marcan_42 and you are free to do that and i would not say that you are a part of marcan-worshipping-cult or following some dogma >deceiving myself into believing it has been achieved by ignoring anything below a certain level if you are stating that this is what FSF believes then you are in fact spreading a falsehood and fud. this is what marcan has been doing…

The FSF is deceiving themselves and others by believing that just because a user no longer has the ability to update firmware on a device, that device is acually no longer running non-free code. I really do not understand what is so hard to understand that from a free software POV there is no distinction between a chip loading a blob from system storage and a chip loading a blob from it's own tiny updatable flash. Bo…

>With regards to firmware, the FSF believes that 2 is better than 1. That is stupid. How do you not see that?

your comparison with MS is ridiculous. FSF software is open. do with their software what you like. FSF believes it should not help you with 1 or 2 due to its principles, and that is OK. why wouldnt it be? the source is there so help yourself if you really want something that they are not willing to help you with (even if they often do apparalently)

anyway this whole exchange is becoming tyring to me. a lot of these comments by people seem to be more about vaging a crusade against FSF than it is about discussing issues in good faith. its somewhat dissapointing, esspecially since i only just realised who marcan is. as far as i am concerned, i am completely unconvinced by marcan and co that FSF is a deceptive organisation and that their work is somehow bad for free software. quite the opposite, i am happy that they exist. i say this simply as a spectator. to me the following comment on their website just clearly shows that they are aware that products they certify run nonfree code:

"If and when free software becomes available for use on a certain secondary processor, we will expect certified products to adopt it within a reasonable period of time. This can be done in the next model of the product, if there is a new model within a reasonable period of time. If this is not done, we will eventually withdraw the certification"

(source given elsewhere in the exchanges)

i do not feel deceived in the slightest. if deception is happening it seems to be regarding FSF's position. take care

Re: I Love Arch, but GNU Guix Is My New Distro

#242

Post by alexvoda »

User23 wrote: post #233
mindslight wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I fully believe in software freedom (including favoring the GPL), and am trying to push it forward with this argument. I just see using a "6300 with microcode 2019-12-18" as the exact same compromise as using a "6200 with microcode 2011-11-14", regardless that the first blob was loaded at runtime while the second blob was loaded at the factory. Neither one lets me audit or modify my processor. There aren't many perfo…

It sounds like we have very similar beliefs. I think the FSF should acknowledge that microcode updates and such are odious but tolerable moral compromises and that we should continue to work for a future where we have complete freedom to modify, repair, and otherwise use our machines as we see fit. However, for fun, I'm going to do my best to steelman the FSF position: The use of non-free software when no free altern…

And here is the error of your logic: "is voluntary, and thus involves a willful violation of the principle of freedom".

Principle of freedom, in the context of the FSF, has always referred to user/recipient freedom.

A user voluntarily (of their on unconstrained freedom) making a (informed) choice for themselves, by definition does not violate their own freedom, they are exercising their freedom. You are contradicting yourself.

Complicit-ness can be debated with regards to purchasing decisions, not with regards to updating firmware.

Re: I Love Arch, but GNU Guix Is My New Distro

#243

Post by kdtsh »

marcan_42 wrote: post #27

> Guix System is an advanced distribution of the GNU operating system. It uses the Linux-libre kernel It's worth pointing out that the linux-libre kernel is developed under the FSF doctrine that "binary blobs are bad unless you can't see them". This has been taken to its logical extreme here, where this Linux fork actively removes security warnings informing users that they need to update their CPU microcode , becaus…

This is an enormous thread now - in case it hasn’t already been mentioned, Guix neither helps nor hinders users from using any kernel they like. There is a repository called nonguix, made available by community members, which includes the upstream, non-free kernel, as well as microcode updates for Intel processors.

The Guix project states clearly that it does not support these uses of the software, but that users are free to use it - because the software is released under the GPL.

So what exactly is the problem? The Guix maintainers consider their users to be competent and able to make decisions for themselves - the charge of ‘evil anti-user behaviour’ isn’t so inappropriate as it is laughable and immature.

Also, as other commenters have mentioned, I have never had a warning that I need to install new microcode from any distribution. As a matter of fact, it would not surprise me if other distributions were not to give me a choice in installing new microcode - if I’m running underpowered hardware (not uncommon for hobby Linux users, especially if the hardware is known to be well supported), and I don’t have much to lose on that hardware, having mitigations against things like Spectre/Meltdown is a calculated decision given the performance impact, so why shouldn’t I at least be able to choose? With Guix, this is a one-liner in your configuration.scm file.

Re: I Love Arch, but GNU Guix Is My New Distro

#244

Post by LargoLasskhyfv »

jrm4 wrote: post #111
marcan_42 wrote: post #27

> Guix System is an advanced distribution of the GNU operating system. It uses the Linux-libre kernel It's worth pointing out that the linux-libre kernel is developed under the FSF doctrine that "binary blobs are bad unless you can't see them". This has been taken to its logical extreme here, where this Linux fork actively removes security warnings informing users that they need to update their CPU microcode , becaus…

Lobbing a charge like "Arbitrary religious dogma" is pretty much the opposite of a reasoned look at what the goals are here. I find the approach interesting. The goal of the Free Software folk was never primarily to "provide the best information to the end user," it is to "preserve software freedom." Guix looks like a possible technical path to do that. Will it work? Will it cause harm? I don't know yet. Either way,…

Cited from the article:

To respect these principles the Guix project (and others) asks to not discuss non-free software, hardware support, or related matters on official channels. These questions and non-free packages are best left to any number of other venues. Guix does not actively hamper a user’s ability to load non-free software or firmware (see freedom 0), but will not support this in any official capacity. That said, the community is very nice and will not kick you from IRC if it comes up (more likely you’ll get some private messages directing you or helping you out), but better to remember their rules.

I think that says all.

"Hush, hush, and don't look under the rugs!"

Re: I Love Arch, but GNU Guix Is My New Distro

#245

Post by kdtsh »

srvmshr wrote: post #4

> In short, GNU Guix is both a package manager you can use in any distro and a full-fledged GNU/Linux distribution, that is modern and advanced Why not just use Nix, which is more battle tested?

For my part, I think Guix has a much nicer CLI experience, and I find the documentation easier to comprehend. I also prefer the Guix DSL in Scheme to the Nix expression language.

I haven’t used NixOS though, which could make things a bit different.

Re: I Love Arch, but GNU Guix Is My New Distro

#247

Post by marcan_42 »

onli wrote: post #219
marcan_42 wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They aren't taking away Intel's ability to push updates to people's computers, because they never had that ability. What the FSF and that Linux fork are doing is taking away users' right to be informed about security vulnerabilities in their system so they can make the choice whether to trust Intel's update or not. By withholding that information they are effectively eliminating the choice, and restricting users' fre…

That's not true. If distros package closed source firmware updates the manufacturer has the ability to provide updates to people's computer via that system. I mean, that's the whole point and in a trustworthy environment that's a good thing. Maybe have a look at https://wiki.debian.org/Microcode#CPU_microcode_non-freeness (I'm not sure whether I'm just misinterpreting your comment or whether there is a knowledge gap,…

> If distros package closed source firmware updates the manufacturer has the ability to provide updates to people's computer via that system.

That is not what linux-libre is doing/refusing to do. What linux-libre is doing is censoring a message to their users that their microcode is out of date and their CPU has security vulnerabilities. They could've just left that in and let users make the choice whether to manually install the microcode updates or not.

> You are mixing up agency and software freedom

Agency is more important than software freedom. The FSF's problem is precisely their blind focus on "software freedom" when the definition of "software" can't even be precisely defined any more, to the detriment of everything else that affects users.

Re: I Love Arch, but GNU Guix Is My New Distro

#248

Post by marcan_42 »

mbakke wrote: post #172
detaro wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

... yes, because your distro did the right thing and does provide updated packages and loads them for you (it's not persistent, but rather done on each boot), and thus you don't need to do anything and also don't see warnings about your distro failing to do so. Whereas linux-libre doesn't want you to know if your distro isn't loading updated microcode, because it's "better" (according to them) to run vulnerable non-u…

> linux-libre doesn't want you to know if your distro isn't loading updated microcode, because it's "better" (according to them) to run vulnerable non-updated microcode This is FUD. The reason it's not possible to load microcode or other proprietary blobs from linux-libre is because of a limitation of the deblobbing process. From [0]: Indeed, I became aware that some users have got the idea that blocking the loading…

The deblobbing script includes an explicit section that censors the microcode update messages.

http://linux-libre.fsfla.org/pub/linux-libre/releases/5.15.3...

Grep for "Do no recommend non-Free microcode update" [sic].

The actual censoring patterns are here:

http://linux-libre.fsfla.org/pub/linux-libre/releases/5.15.3...

Grep for "arch/x86/kernel/apic/apic.c" to find some of them.

Re: I Love Arch, but GNU Guix Is My New Distro

#249

Post by dang »

ckastner wrote: post #61

I guess that in their mind, they're producing code for some utopic x86 system that does not have non-open microcode baked in, in which case their approach would be right. This is a complete denial of reality, of course, and at the cost of the user. Religious dogma, as you put it, seems like an apt description.

You broke the site guidelines with this comment and it started a flamewar. Please don't do that; we're trying to avoid it here.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29286715.

Re: I Love Arch, but GNU Guix Is My New Distro

#250

Post by dang »

marcan_42 wrote: post #64
ckastner wrote: post #61

I guess that in their mind, they're producing code for some utopic x86 system that does not have non-open microcode baked in, in which case their approach would be right. This is a complete denial of reality, of course, and at the cost of the user. Religious dogma, as you put it, seems like an apt description.

Their approach is firmly stuck in the computing paradigm of the 70s and 80s, much like Stallman is personally stuck in the social narrative of the same era. The FSF and him refuse to change and adapt to the times. But since reality doesn't care about their refusal to adapt, and they can't just throw their hands up in the air and say nothing is free any more and you should just live off the grid and reject all technol…

Please don't take HN threads further into flamewar. It lowers the quality of discussion noticeably.

Also, please omit inflammatory swipes like your "Edit", which also badly broke more than one of the site guidelines. Would you mind reviewing them? We're really trying to avoid this sort of hell to the extent possible.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Post reply on HN