TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

Debian votes for non-free firmware in the installer

128 pointsby simjueover 2 years ago

15 comments

BirAdamover 2 years ago
Mixed and competing thoughts and emotions. On the one hand, I love that Debian was the community GNU/Linux that shipped with the ability to be 100% unencumbered super easily. On the other hand, I feel like a system should be usable immediately with little effort if it is to be enjoyed and properly useful. Then there’s part of me screaming “tradition not trend” and another part of me is screaming back with “finally!” It would be nice if they made it optional within the installer I suppose. Maybe I’m just a crazy person.
评论 #33055910 未加载
评论 #33055608 未加载
评论 #33055914 未加载
评论 #33057937 未加载
评论 #33055707 未加载
mindslightover 2 years ago
Unfortunately &quot;non-free firmware&quot; doesn&#x27;t really capture the entire issue, akin to how the FSF misses the mark with their baked-into-flash exception. Proprietary binary blob on a device effectively separated by an IOMMU? That&#x27;s a peripheral, most of them run non-free firmware. Proprietary binary blob on a device that has DMA access? That&#x27;s a tainted main computer with a security issue.<p>I hope the installer settles out into making these distinctions and informing users of the compromises being made. When I stick a Debian installer into a machine that requires non-free firmware to work, my intent is pretty clear. But that doesn&#x27;t apply to someone just starting out.
评论 #33056822 未加载
评论 #33057897 未加载
Nextgridover 2 years ago
Finally. The user experience of manually providing non-free firmware on a separate USB stick was horrible, even for a technical user.<p>What Debian really expects are DEB <i>packages</i> placed on the drive, not raw firmware files. Finding which package you need (the installer only tells you the raw firmware files, not the package containing them) and obtaining them is not straightforward - there is a web UI to browse packages and download files but navigating those requires existing domain knowledge of Debian and Linux in general. It is not a straightforward web form &quot;want a package? enter package name and architecture and we&#x27;ll give you the download link&quot;.<p>I now know from memory which firmware packages my systems need and the requirements for the USB stick and how to navigate the web UIs to download packages, but the first time probably wasted an hour of my time searching around before piecing all the various (and sometimes contradictory) resources out there into a coherent solution that worked.
评论 #33056067 未加载
ninefathomover 2 years ago
Like most folks here, I have mixed feelings about this. The dichotomy of &quot;it&#x27;s about time&quot; versus &quot;how tragic that it came to this&quot; seems to be common, and I can get on board with that.<p>Having said that, I don&#x27;t think that having firmware blobs in the installer should be Debian&#x27;s hill to die on, and I&#x27;m glad they decided to acquiesce to practical necessity. Between wireless NICs and graphics devices, it&#x27;s just too blasted difficult these days to install a FOSS operating system without binary blobs - good, bad, or ugly, it is what it is, and I respect their ability to recognize when something simply cannot be changed [at this time].<p>Keep picking your battles, Debian crew - keep fighting the good fight.
throwaway81523over 2 years ago
This is almost lolsville. First they wall off the GNU Emacs documention for not conforming with the DFSG, but then they make the <i>installer</i> non-free? Sigh.
评论 #33058036 未加载
daptaqover 2 years ago
So this is only for the installer, right? The software that is not needed for basic functionality will not be installed permanently, right?<p>Also, if there are two driver implementations, as is often the case for GPUs, which will be preferred?
评论 #33055613 未加载
评论 #33055620 未加载
mrweaselover 2 years ago
I suppose this is meant for Debian developers, who are use to a certain style of communication, but that was a really hard read.
评论 #33055572 未加载
评论 #33055550 未加载
alfiedotwtfover 2 years ago
Why don&#x27;t they just make `contrib` and `non-free` selectable but default unselected within the installer?
评论 #33055708 未加载
评论 #33055703 未加载
spit2windover 2 years ago
What&#x27;s &quot;SC&quot;?
评论 #33055490 未加载
评论 #33055492 未加载
Koshkinover 2 years ago
Shouldn’t firmware in general be considered part of the “hardware tier”? Free software, including Debian, had no choice but to run on non-free hardware since inception anyway, right?
评论 #33057146 未加载
评论 #33056284 未加载
guilhasover 2 years ago
Open source Developers should be support more open hardware not worried about supporting the latest closed dodgy firmware<p>Isn&#x27;t this what made Debian popular? Maybe this is good news for new distributions like Nix and Guix<p>And a firmware free wifi usb costs 10$ on ebay or ali express<p>Or maybe this is just a clarification for Debian identity , why support non-free except on the installation? <i>Let&#x27;s just hope in their SC it is clarified to always ask the user, and only enabled it by manually</i>
评论 #33057446 未加载
nortonhamover 2 years ago
One of the things about debian that made it unique was the debian social contract, and the dedication to free software. The way this is celebrated in some quarters is troubling.<p>Getting the non-free firmware iso in case your hardware needed it was never difficult.
teddyhover 2 years ago
Reaction: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;fiendish&#x2F;The-Debian-Gotham-Needs" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;fiendish&#x2F;The-Debian-Gotham-Needs</a>
jacooperover 2 years ago
Yay, finally some common sense in the Debian UX.
_joelover 2 years ago
Seems sensible, there&#x27;s still purist debian distros for the purists