[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: hplip 3.16.9+repack0-1 MIGRATED to testing



El 03/10/16 a les 10:55, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud ha escrit:
> Hi Narcis,
> 
> Le dimanche, 2 octobre 2016, 14.03:24 h CEST Narcis Garcia a écrit :
>> hplip packages in main repository are a fork of HPLIP by HewlettPackard
>> without proprietary firmware that HP includes in their packages.
> 
> The HPLIP packages don't provide the proprietary firmwares directly either in 
> their source tarball (e.g. https://sourceforge.net/projects/hplip/files/hplip/
> 3.16.9/hplip-3.16.9.tar.gz)  and that's what the Debian packages use as source 
> package.
> 

I was noting difference between hplipopensource.com binary downloads
(contain both FOSS and proprietary stuff) and Debian repositories
packages (contain only FOSS).


>> There are more and more HP multifunction printer models that require
>> proprietary firmware to be loaded by the driver, and hplip"opensource"
>> catalog says that user needs a newer HPLIP version than your OS
>> repositories provide; but the truth is that user must download HPLIP
>> from HP official website and run their particular intaller.
> 
> I don't think that's true for basic functions (printing locally & over the 
> network). Granted, the binary plugin is often needed for network scanning, and 
> that sucks…
> 
> Can you point to a specific printer that would need the binary plugin for 
> _printing_ ?
> 

I don't remember a model about printing, but yes: a model about local
scanning (through USB):
HP LaserJet Pro 100 color MFP


>> I don't know if HP is not providing complete HPLIP software to OS
>> packagers, or OS packagers are discarding proprietary components.
>> I suppose that complete hplip Debian packages should go to "non-free"
>> repository:
> 
> What is it that you are trying to say? The 'hplip' we ship in Debian is 
> entirely free software and enables to print to a very large variety of HP 
> printers, I don't see why it should be moved to 'non-free' (it _is_ free 
> afterall).
> 
> That said, the binary plugin is certainly a problem, but removing free 
> software from Debian is not going to help anyone.
> 

FOSS packages in Debian repositories lack of proprietary binaries
provided by HP. When user chooses to get drivers from
hplipopensource.com and follow HP announced steps, devices reach full
working, and not when user uses Debian FOSS packages.


Reply to: