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

Debian and firmware

blog.einval.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 180 posts

Re: Debian and firmware

#11

Post by majormajor »

hypothesis wrote: post #5
majormajor wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> As bad as it is in the short term the only way we'll see long term change is to keep the friction on. It's this friction that forces the change of habit to support manufacturers who open their firmware. If it's seamless then there's no incentive to seek out the open option next time you buy. My experience is the same as the author's: there's more today that needs non-free support to use Linux on the desktop than th…

> My experience is the same as the author's: there's more today that needs non-free support to use Linux on the desktop than there was in the past. Is that a function of Linux Desktop simply being more capable nowadays? Also, there is a world of difference between not publishing signed closed-source firmware for a driver that does not exist vs having an open source driver with published firmware.

I wouldn't say the Linux Desktop has gotten any more capable since Compiz, so no. (Nor have most desktops - depending on how much you value things like iMessage integration in modern Macs.) Before that, since... Phoenix/Firebird/Firefox and the decline of IE-only sites? Office file format compatibility?

It's more the examples provided in the original article: cpu firmware blobs, network firmware blobs, same as always, just even more.

Re: Debian and firmware

#12

Post by usrn »

qbasic_forever wrote: post #8
cube00 wrote: post #2

As bad as it is in the short term the only way we'll see long term change is to keep the friction on. It's this friction that forces the change of habit to support manufacturers who open their firmware. If it's seamless then there's no incentive to seek out the open option next time you buy. In my personal case nVidia stopped supporting my graphics card and eventually their binary blob stopped working with the newer…

What incentive do manufacturers have to release open firmware? Let's get serious, it's been 20+ years and desktop Linux usage isn't moving the needle or getting any of their attention. IMHO it would be far better to put effort into change at a different level, like perhaps a broader push with right to repair legislation that expands it to include releasing firmware in addition to schematics, spare parts, etc. Change…

Everyone in the embedded space goes to kernel.org for WiFi stuff (firmware, regulatory info etc) regardless of which OS they're using. Being put at the top of the Wiki because you're "easy to work with" would be a massive advertisement.

Re: Debian and firmware

#13

Post by usrn »

hypothesis wrote: post #5
majormajor wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> As bad as it is in the short term the only way we'll see long term change is to keep the friction on. It's this friction that forces the change of habit to support manufacturers who open their firmware. If it's seamless then there's no incentive to seek out the open option next time you buy. My experience is the same as the author's: there's more today that needs non-free support to use Linux on the desktop than th…

> My experience is the same as the author's: there's more today that needs non-free support to use Linux on the desktop than there was in the past. Is that a function of Linux Desktop simply being more capable nowadays? Also, there is a world of difference between not publishing signed closed-source firmware for a driver that does not exist vs having an open source driver with published firmware.

That's a good point. I think the author might be forgetting using ndis wrapper to run Windows drivers (so that's non-free software on the same machine as your OS) for unsupported network cards. We've come farther and have new, different problems now. The situation then looked bleak much like the situation now.

Re: Debian and firmware

#14

Post by b5n »

As a long time Debian user I'm reluctant to criticize developer ergonomics as I'm not an _active_ contributor. That being said, _as a user_, I've not had any issue locating and using non-free firmware when required, and I would be disappointed to see the project change course by including non-free components in an offical manner. Removing the slight inconvenience (literally clicking a link _on the installation page_ and downloading the firmware included image) further dilutes the project's free software position and will encourage users to install software that does not respect their freedoms. If users never brush up against the inconvenience they'll be much less likely to seek out hardware alternatives or even educate themselves on the topic at all, this is damaging to the community as a whole.

I know I'm in the minority, and expect my opinion to be weighted accordingly, but principle is a key factor I use when choosing anything - including software. My loyalty to Debian would be significantly impacted by such a change.

Is Debian missing projected growth KPI's or shedding users? Is this a key hurdle to onboarding new contributors? I'm aware there may be other considerations that those actively participating in the community or leadership may be aware of that I am not, and I might be ignorant to the full value of the proposition. Debian is amazing and I have the upmost respect for everyone involved over the decades, but a move in a direction that weakens its position on non-free components would most likely drive me to using Guix exclusively.

Re: Debian and firmware

#15

Post by NovemberWhiskey »

cube00 wrote: post #2

As bad as it is in the short term the only way we'll see long term change is to keep the friction on. It's this friction that forces the change of habit to support manufacturers who open their firmware. If it's seamless then there's no incentive to seek out the open option next time you buy. In my personal case nVidia stopped supporting my graphics card and eventually their binary blob stopped working with the newer…

>the only way we'll see long term change is to keep the friction on

... but there are two possible long term changes, right?

In one of them, the friction incrementally pushes manufacturers not to have proprietary firmware and the number of machines supported by the Debian official install improves.

In the other one, the friction incrementally discourages users from installing Debian, and they either give up on Linux or adopt a distribution that isn't quite so user-hostile.

Re: Debian and firmware

#16

Post by devdao »

b5n wrote: post #14

As a long time Debian user I'm reluctant to criticize developer ergonomics as I'm not an _active_ contributor. That being said, _as a user_, I've not had any issue locating and using non-free firmware when required, and I would be disappointed to see the project change course by including non-free components in an offical manner. Removing the slight inconvenience (literally clicking a link _on the installation page_…

Principles matter!

Re: Debian and firmware

#17

Post by genghizkhan »

3np wrote: post #10

My 5c: Debian is a free base distro. For users who want an all-batteries-included image including non-free firmware, there are derivatives like Mint and Ubuntu. If someone wants to step up and maintain [Debian+non-free-firmware] releases, this will probably be greatly appreciated but it should not come at the expense of maintaining the rest of Debian and stretching their already thin resources. One thing that could s…

Debian already maintains these images and has non-free firmware packages. They're just not enabled on the main installation disc by default. You can get non-free Debian images, they're just harder to get to.

Edit: Here we go. They're "unoffical" images for sure, but they seem to be maintained similarly to the official ones. https://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/unofficial/non-free/cd-in...

Re: Debian and firmware

#18

Post by thrown12 »

cube00 wrote: post #2

As bad as it is in the short term the only way we'll see long term change is to keep the friction on. It's this friction that forces the change of habit to support manufacturers who open their firmware. If it's seamless then there's no incentive to seek out the open option next time you buy. In my personal case nVidia stopped supporting my graphics card and eventually their binary blob stopped working with the newer…

>As bad as it is in the short term the only way we'll see long term change is to keep the friction on. It's this friction that forces the change of habit to support manufacturers who open their firmware. If it's seamless then there's no incentive to seek out the open option next time you buy.

The only friction you're causing is to Debian users. My current laptop is Arch after 5 laptops that ran Debian. My Debian desktop is barely functional with the friendliest AMD GPU to Linux I could find.

By my next update cycle I will be Debian free for the first time in 20 years. Debian needs less friction if it wants to keep me as a user.

Re: Debian and firmware

#19

Post by Brian_K_White »

Do not agree. Let the countless others do that.

Can anyone say with a straight face that there is anything wrong with Debian's vision or principles merely existing somewhere in the world?

Ok, so they exist somewhere in the world, in Debian.

And it predates you. Debian didn't come along and fuck up your life. There is no basis for any kind of "take it back" idea to "fix" Debian.

If you don't subscribe to those principles, great news! The entire rest of the world agrees with you! Go use Ubuntu or Mint or really anything.

If your argument is that Debian is an important base for countless users of other distros, and so it's inconsiderate or irresponsible or something not to serve all those indirect users better (according to your personal definition of "better"), well then why ARE so many other distros choosing Debian's shoulders to stand on if it's so unhelpful? All those other distros are perfectly free to provide their own base the "right" way.

You in fact are free yourself to launch a new better os to replace Debian. Go ahead. No one is stopping you. Show those backwards clods how it's done by practical people with their heads screwed on straight.

Re: Debian and firmware

#20

Post by b5n »

NovemberWhiskey wrote: post #15
cube00 wrote: post #2

As bad as it is in the short term the only way we'll see long term change is to keep the friction on. It's this friction that forces the change of habit to support manufacturers who open their firmware. If it's seamless then there's no incentive to seek out the open option next time you buy. In my personal case nVidia stopped supporting my graphics card and eventually their binary blob stopped working with the newer…

> the only way we'll see long term change is to keep the friction on ... but there are two possible long term changes, right? In one of them, the friction incrementally pushes manufacturers not to have proprietary firmware and the number of machines supported by the Debian official install improves. In the other one, the friction incrementally discourages users from installing Debian, and they either give up on Linux…

Depends on how you define 'user-hostile'. There's already a link to the non-free image on the current installation page, and I wouldn't consider respecting your freedoms as hostile.
Post reply on HN