Re: If Debian support OS certification?
On Thu, May 04, 2017 at 07:56:45AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
>On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:17 AM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
>
>> No, they should not, otherwise this certification becomes meaningless.
>
>I see these certifications primarily as a service to Debian users and
>not as endorsements of vendors, but as statements of fact. The
>consequences to users should stated as part of the certification
>output. "This system can run Debian main", "This system is missing
>drivers for XYZ", "This system requires non-free firmware", "This
>system requires a custom bootloader", "This system requires a custom
>kernel", "This system requires a custom kernel and must use sysvinit",
>"This system requires an unofficial Debian port", "This system
>requires recompiling Debian from scratch" (CPU requirements bumps or
>CPU bugs). Basically, a more automated version of InstallingDebianOn.
>
>If Debian only certifies systems installed using official d-i images
>then we won't be certifying much, since almost everything requires
>preinstalled or runtime-loaded non-free firmware for some part of the
>system. We would basically only be able to certify RYF devices and may
>as well just require FSF RYF certification up-front before a system
>can be certified for Debian use.
Are you really claiming that systems already shipped with *firmware
included* can't be installed using d-i? That's rather bogus, if
so. Please explain?
--
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK. steve@einval.com
Mature Sporty Personal
More Innovation More Adult
A Man in Dandism
Powered Midship Specialty
Reply to: