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

Re: Debian Etch Install

Hash: SHA1

Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> Johannes Wiedersich put forth on 12/22/2009 4:10 AM:
>> Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>>> Kevin Ross put forth on 12/21/2009 2:13 PM:
>> All this might be valid statistics, but they are beyond the point. The
>> point in this thread is the question from a particular OP who does *not*
>> have access to a wired network. *Period*.
> No, he said he does, but that it's "inconvenient".  It's also inconvenient to
> install from media, then immediately turn around, change apt sources to the
> mirrors, and download all the security updates since the CD/DVD was pressed.
> One must choose one's inconvenience, I guess.

Sorry, I mixed up OP and one of the replies about sharing a DSL
connection with one's neighbours.

>>> As for the embedded stuff like arm, those aren't user PCs, so they don't count
>>> in this thread. 
>> Why not?
>> http://www.alwaysinnovating.com/touchbook/
>> This looks like a consumer PC, at least to me.
> Yep, sure does.  However it's not in the class of Linux running ARM devices I
> was describing is it?  

It just adds one example to the use cases, where a netinstall via wired
network does not work, because the manufacturer just specifies wireless,
but no wired connector. I guess that the number of devices of that
category are increasing, even though over the past 10 years they were
the exception.

Do you really think you are the one to decide 'what counts in this

> It's a statistical exception to the rule.  I love your
> creative cut/quote of my statements, eliminating the context. 

It is customary on this list to trim messages. I don't think that I
unfairly cut too much context.

>> Which wireless is fully supported by debian and free software? I don't
>> think there is *any* on the planet that works without proprietary,
>> binary non-free code.
> There you go again.  Mangling context, and now attributing inferred statements
> to me that I did not make.  Quote me stating "GPL" or "open source" driver
> anywhere in my previous posts.  I didn't.  My statement was something to the
> effect of "buy a wireless card that is supported by the Debian installer
> kernel".  Do I need to somehow explain that further?  

- From Debian's web site: "Debian is a free operating system (OS) for your
computer. " Debian's social contract further details that only 'free'
software as in liberty, not just beer is allowed in Debian. If there are
still any non-free drivers present in debian's kernel, those will be
removed. Some/many non-free, non-GPL or similar drivers are available
for Debian, but they are not released by Debian. They are not part of
the Debian OS. They are not supported by the "Debian installer kernel".
They have to be installed *seperately*.

>                                                      It seems pretty darn
> clear.  The installer kernel has a finite number of wireless device modules.  If
> one's device uses one of those drivers, you can do a wireless net install.  My
> statement had nothing to do with open or closed source drivers.  Why are you
> trying to beat me over the head with a statement I did not make?

Your statement was about a driver being part of Debian. I thought it was
obvious to the readers of this very list, that non-free drivers might
work with debian machines, but are _not_ part of the Debian OS.

- --

Three nations have not officially adopted the International System
of Units as their primary or sole system of measurement: Burma,
Liberia, and the United States.

Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)


Reply to: