Re: Firmware - what are we going to do about it?
> On 25 Apr 2022, at 19:40, Andrey Rahmatullin <wrar@debian.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 05:53:03PM +0200, Paul van der Vlis wrote:
>>>>>> I have an idea for an extra option:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 6. Put the closed source firmware somewhere in the Debian images, but never
>>>>>> install closed source firmware by default. "No" should be the default.
>>>>> That's the option 3 more or less.
>>>>
>>>> Option 3 says to publish two sets of images.
>>>>
>>>> ----
>>>> 3. We could stop pretending that the non-free images are unofficial, and
>>>> maybe move them alongside the normal free images so they're published
>>>> together. This would make them easier to find for people that need them, but
>>>> is likely to cause users to question why we still make any images without
>>>> firmware if they're otherwise identical.
>>>> ----
>>> If you want to drop the non-firmware image then it's the option 4 more or
>>> less.
>>
>> I see it more like option 5, with the difference that no closed source
>> firmware or repository will be installed by default. With the non-free ISO
>> this is the case.
>>
>> For people who don't like closed source firmware, it gives the option not to
>> install some firmware. E.g.: do I need that bluetooth adapter?
> As I said, this is about d-i questions and defaults more than it's about
> ISO choices and content.
While what you’re saying is technically true, the default selection means much more than a default. It’s defines the stance of Debian, as a whole.
So, if Option 5 is adopted, the default state is as important as the step itself IMHO. I also still believe that giving people the tools for assembling their "firmware enabled” install media is a valid option, but it’s not favored as far as I can see (no hard feelings, though).
>> And we stay a possibility for FSF-people.
> FSF people condemned Debian long ago:
> https://www.gnu.org/distros/common-distros.html#Debian
While I like and support what FSF is standing for, I don’t think their “condemnation” is a valid reason for not pursuing the ideals DFSG puts forward. In my opinion, DFSG is one of the things underpins the essence of Debian, and is a force for creating a more free and open world. We’re almost there on the driver side, and while it gonna take some time, we can be there on the firmware side. We just have to be persistent, sometimes stubborn even.
>> Most SSD devices also have firmware, do you update that firmware?
> Sure.
>
> --
> WBR, wRAR
Reply to: