161–170 of 241 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think lxc on Debian has ever needed snapd? https://packages.debian.org/bullseye/lxc
They're probably running lxd (which is only packaged for snap as far as I know), lxd is controlled by the "lxc" command (which isn't part of lxc...).
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.
Testing this out in a VM. I want to move away from Ubuntu (honestly, from SNAPs)
I'm also considering this, but I'm a little afraid of being stuck in the slow lane when it comes to software updates. I'm aware of Backports, but I'm led to believe it has a somewhat limited selection. Perhaps this is a good opportunity to try a combination of Debian, for general system stability, and Nix, for specific tools where I need newer releases? Has anyone tried this combination before? If so, how did you fin…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Testing this out in a VM. I want to move away from Ubuntu (honestly, from SNAPs)
I'm also considering this, but I'm a little afraid of being stuck in the slow lane when it comes to software updates. I'm aware of Backports, but I'm led to believe it has a somewhat limited selection. Perhaps this is a good opportunity to try a combination of Debian, for general system stability, and Nix, for specific tools where I need newer releases? Has anyone tried this combination before? If so, how did you fin…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is it sad? Actually working Linux on real hardware is far more important than purity IMO.
>Actually working Linux on real hardware is far more important than purity IMO. I agree, but I also think this depends heavily on who you ask. Stallman for example would rather have poorer functionality than compromise his personal (extremist) ethical principles. There are a lot of folks who use laptops without wifi because the blobs are non free, so they're using ancient ThinkPads plugged into Ethernet. Much depends…
Stallman is open to pragmatism now and again. For example, on this very topic:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-hardware-designs.en.html
> We can envision a future in which our personal fabricators can make chips, and our robots can assemble and solder them together with transformers, switches, keys, displays, fans and so on. In that future we will all make our own computers (and fabricators and robots), and we will all be able to take advantage of modified designs made by those who know hardware. The arguments for rejecting nonfree software will then apply to nonfree hardware designs too.
> That future is years away, at least. In the meantime, there is no need to reject hardware with nonfree designs on principle.
A lot of end users of different distros do not even know that Debian is the foundation. I will as go as far as to say Debian had solved a lot of the hard issues and then other sprinkle it. (Probably not a popular view)
Anyways thanks to all the Debian team members. Your work ought to be better known.
Also, an estimated 96.3% of packages are built reproducibly for amd64.
https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/debian/bookworm/index_...
Congratulations to the Debian team! An important change appears to be the inclusion of non-free firmware by default in the official install image for the first time, as a result of this vote: https://www.debian.org/vote/2022/vote_003 Intriguing. I feel a little torn on this. One the one hand, I appreciate being able to install Debian from an official image onto a bothersome device. On the other, I can't help but feel…
I was involved in the discussion, and I'm also torn on that issue, but at least you can disable installation of non-free firmware and install Debian without any non-free software. On the other hand, firmware is a convoluted issue. It was always present, but became increasingly visible over the years. While I'm a strong Free Software supporter, firmware is one of the hardest parts to convert, because of the IP it enta…
Including but making it optional was an excellent decision. Those who need will get what they want, those who don't will have the same result as with Bullseye.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Well, it seems it did not last.