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

Debian 12 “Bookworm”

debian.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 241 posts

Re: Debian 12 “Bookworm”

#151

Post by yjftsjthsd-h »

pja wrote: post #105
guiambros wrote: post #95

What a weird announcement. It says " To install Debian 12 bookworm ... you can choose from a variety of installation media types to Download... " and " If you simply want to try Debian 12 bookworm... you can use one of the available live images " as if it were all available, but in fact the Debian 12 images are not ready. It feels like the blog post was written before images were created, but they forgot to add a com…

The CD images should be downloadable towards the end of the day if previous releases are anything to go by. This HN post jumped the gun a little with the Debian Wiki page: the final official release happens when https://debian.org/ gets updated to point to the new installation media.

We seem to have this conversation for every release; I wish Debian would make it very explicit when exactly a new release is "released", perhaps by sticking a banner at the top of the relevant pages that says something like "Debian 12 'Bookworm' has NOT been formally released but is expected to ship at $TIME/$DATE"

Re: Debian 12 “Bookworm”

#152

Post by encom »

OfSanguineFire wrote: post #62
encom wrote: post #26

But it's /not/ released though. Their own news section mentions that cd images are still being built, which seems like something that should have happened already. There's nothing but 11.7 available for download.

The bookworm apt repository is in the final state, so Bookworm is released for those with existing Debian installations who can just do a search/replace of "bullseye" to "bookworm" in their apt.sources file, and run apt dist-upgrade.

Sure, but the announcement mentions and links to Bookworm media downloads which are old 11.7 media. It's confusing, annoying and honestly kind of amateurish. I like Debian, but this is a screw-up. 20:00 in mainland Europe and it's still not out. My work laptop is in a sad state of semi-brokenness (self-inflicted), and I had been looking forward to giving it a fresh start over the weekend. Now I'll have to wait another week.

Re: Debian 12 “Bookworm”

#153

Post by m463 »

Kwpolska wrote: post #96
yrro wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Debian was never a purist distribution. If it was then there wouldn't have been a non-free section in the archive in the first place. The sad truth is that the Linux distributions recommended by the FSF have approximately zero users.

Is it sad? Actually working Linux on real hardware is far more important than purity IMO.

Ubuntu is based on debian and is pretty pragmatic in that respect.

it makes it easy to get working

...and it also carefully attempts to lock you in using packages that can't¹ be disabled.

just saying it is a slippery slope.

[1] well with effort you can

https://www.baeldung.com/linux/snap-remove-disable

https://gist.github.com/jfeilbach/f4d0b19df82e04bea8f10cdd59...

Re: Debian 12 “Bookworm”

#154

Post by NikkiA »

cesarb wrote: post #67
GrumpySloth wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never had a computer which would work with the official ideologically-pure installer. Always had to use the non-free one. I'm glad this vote turned out the way it did.

> I've never had a computer which would work with the official ideologically-pure installer. I had more than once, back when I first installed Debian in the late 1900s and early 2000s, and I believe my experience wasn't unique. Back then, not requiring any loadable firmware was common; the hardware either didn't require firmware, or came with the full firmware in a ROM chip in the device itself. And that explains the…

Same, and I used to keep a little cache of 'known working without firmware issues' wlan cards (pcmcia), I probably still have some somewhere; though I don't think I have any pcmcia capable laptops anymore

Re: Debian 12 “Bookworm”

#155

Post by dezgeg »

roenxi wrote: post #28
progval wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For devices which have firmware, does it matter whether the firmware is loaded by the OS rather than hardcoded inside the device? The former at least gives an opportunity to fix bugs. And if I'm not mistaken, this isn't about kernel blobs (which run on the CPU as kernel code), only code that gets loaded on devices (including CPU microcode).

There is a little ritual we do here from time to time where someone writes a comment that starts something like "Well, I didn't expect Stallman would be right about [issue now being reported on] but he predicted this years ago". If it can go wrong it will, and if software isn't free then its owners will do things that the users really do not like. In this case, if they can fix bugs they can reduce functionality post-…

How can you ever really be sure that there is no way to change the code running on the hardware, either unintentionally via some exploit, or intentionally via a deliberate backdoor or a debugging interface enabled in production?

As a practical example, I have never heard anyone considering the freedomness of firmware in eMMC flash memory chips. But the talk "eMMC hacking, or: how I fixed long-dead Galaxy S3 phones" from CCC reveals that actually, Samsung eMMC chips have an undocumented debug interface to read/write the RAM of the firmware running on the ARM core inside the eMMC chip.

Re: Debian 12 “Bookworm”

#156

Post by m463 »

unpopularopp wrote: post #24

A bit offtopic... are there any distros besides PoPOS that comes with the proprietary Nvidia drivers preinstalled? I tried to use (live image) Debian on an RTX 4070 PC and nothing worked just black screen after GRUB. PoPOS works out of the box but honestly I'd prefer something more simple as Debian.

A lot of times you can fix boot issues like this by adding "nomodeset" to the boot command line

I always had trouble booting proxmox the first time, because even though it is a server os with no graphics, the installer is graphical. I would get black screen at boot.

I would just interrupt hte boot use 'e' to edit the command line, add 'nomodeset' and it would boot.

Re: Debian 12 “Bookworm”

#157

Post by chungy »

guerrilla wrote: post #136
tuukkah wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ubuntu and its derivatives are included.

Is Ubuntu still Debian based? What's the criterion for that anyway? Just using debs?

Ubuntu releases are, effectively, snapshots of Debian sid every 6 months. That's a pretty strong basis.

Re: Debian 12 “Bookworm”

#158

Post by dezgeg »

yrro wrote: post #35
unpopularopp wrote: post #24

A bit offtopic... are there any distros besides PoPOS that comes with the proprietary Nvidia drivers preinstalled? I tried to use (live image) Debian on an RTX 4070 PC and nothing worked just black screen after GRUB. PoPOS works out of the box but honestly I'd prefer something more simple as Debian.

How does PoPOS accomplish this without violating the license of the kernel and the NVIDIA drivers?

The sad truth is the license of non-GPL Linux kernel modules is very rarely cared about nor enforced. There are ton of embedded devices that don't bother with the NVIDIA shim scheme but ship with straight proprietary .ko:s on the device.

Re: Debian 12 “Bookworm”

#159

Post by yrro »

sylware wrote: post #90
biorach wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's because systemd is the default. You can choose sysvinit during installation https://wiki.debian.org/Init#Changing_the_init_system_-_at_i...

Allright, I may not need devuan gnu/linux in the future since I can choose at installation time the init system on debian. But it seems the efforts to actually restore the compatibility of some components with sysvinit is from devuan, not debian. May be wrong again. Those are steps in the right direction. But I stay alert: I know that sysvinit experience could be actually desastrous on debian compared to devuan. Not…

> But it seems the efforts to actually restore the compatibility of some components with sysvinit is from devuan, not debian.

Don't blame Debian if the Debuan contributors fail to send their patches upstream.

Re: Debian 12 “Bookworm”

#160

Post by chungy »

yrro wrote: post #35
unpopularopp wrote: post #24

A bit offtopic... are there any distros besides PoPOS that comes with the proprietary Nvidia drivers preinstalled? I tried to use (live image) Debian on an RTX 4070 PC and nothing worked just black screen after GRUB. PoPOS works out of the box but honestly I'd prefer something more simple as Debian.

How does PoPOS accomplish this without violating the license of the kernel and the NVIDIA drivers?

Since it is a distribution by a hardware vendor that ships NVIDIA GPUs, I'll assume that they got a licensed from NVIDIA to ship their operating system with the proprietary drivers.
Post reply on HN