Re: Debian non-free-firmware policy making OS misleading and Free Software unfriendly
On Sun, Apr 21, 2024 at 11:31:03AM -0700, Reid wrote:
> Debian's policy change on non-free-firmware has made much of the Debian.org
> website very misleading, and some Debian OS installers have become very
> Free Software UNfriendly and deceptive. The following is my experience,
> and the reasons why I believe Debian must re-word their promotional web
> pages, and update all their installers to respect user choice regarding
> installation of non-free-firmware or not:
I respect your experience. I think Debian made strenuous efforts to
make the change, to publicise it, to hold an open vote. It was covered
by a bunch of the tech press - it wasn't hidden in any way.
Others have pointed you to the resources on that.
>
> I'm a 10+ year Debian user, and a longtime Free Software supporter. Two
> weeks ago I was shocked to discover 29 non-free components in the Debian
> desktop I'd been using for the last couple months. There hadn't been any
> opt-in or even a notice about Debian's major policy change during the
> installation process (I use the Debian installer via the Live images),
> so I was completely unaware.
>
That's probably a bug in Calamares. I checked with one of the live cd
maintainers on this. As has been pointed out, the live cd is really
intended more for checking than for major use but it does need some work.
If you found the non-free components - where were they - under the /firmware
directory?
> In my initial attempts to figure out what was going on, I also didn't find
> any prominent announcement of the major policy change on Debian.org's
> homepage. Moreover, the "Our Philosophy" and "Why Debian" homepage links
> still give the impression that Debian is Free-Software-Friendly. That's extremely misleading now (automatically installing 29 non-free components with neither permission nor warning is not Free Software friendly).
>
Debian *is* Free software friendly: the manufacturers aren't and the non-free
firmware included is to allow people to actually install Debian. The project
deliberately split the firmware out into a new repository, tagged as non-free
and gave instructions as to what that was. The Project doesn't recommend
the use of other non-free software but retains that repository separately for
those that want to use it.
> If Debian is going to continue promoting itself with those "Our Philosophy"
> and "Why Debian" pages, there should at least be opt-ins during the
> installation process of every Debian download, as well as prominent warnings
> of the new policy on the download pages. Until that's done, the
> "Our Philosophy" and "Why Debian" pages (and perhaps others) should be
> re-worded so as to not be so misleading.
>
The philosophy remains the same: there is an option during installation
and there are explicit opt-ins to each repository that gets added to
/etc/apt/sources.list or equivalent. If you *really* want to check,
do an expert install of Debian which includes the lowest priority questions
that can generally be omitted in a standard install.
> I was disappointed to eventually read of Debian's "vote"
> on non-free-firmware. Though I do understand the desire to make Debian more
> friendly to new users, doing so by misleading and alienating many existing
> users doesn't make a lot of sense IMO:
>
The vote was as standard vote via General Resolution not just a "vote".
Doing this has allowed some new users to install Debian. Visually impaired
users may need non-free firmware just to be able to hear the installer:
others may need WiFi to work - not all machines now have Ethernet available.
> After reading of this change, I then spent the next week trying to figure
> out how to re-install Debian without the non-free firmware. That's when I
> discovered that Debian has suddenly become very Free-Software-UNfriendly.
> Even when I used the "firmware=never" method on the Debian installer
> (Live image dvd), the 29 non-free components were still installed! Without
> warning. That "firmware=never" method is what Debian.org itself is
> recommending (on a rather deep link sadly), but it doesn't even work!
>
See above: this may be a consequence of using the live DVD
> So I eventually abandoned that longtime favorite method of installing my
> preferred desktop, and switched to the NON-Live DVD installation... But
> then discovered that using "firmware=never" method there also blocks
> FREE-firmware that used to get installed. So now my Wifi adapter didn't
> work, whereas it always worked with Debian 11/Bullseye and earlier
> installations.
Which chipset, please? If you installed the free firmware package, what
changed?
>
> Ultimately it took me about a week, and about a dozen Debian Bookworm re-installations, and even hiring a developer, to get an installation via DVD that was similar to what was previously installed by default. I've provided some tips below to others who are struggling. However, Debian needs to change all it's installers to provide "opt-in" for anything non-free. Even if that "opt-in" is checked by default, it should be easy to opt-out. Debian's current leadership may have lost sight of their own "Why Debian" and "Our Philosophy" and "Who we are and what we do" claims, but Free Software philosophy is still important to many people. Actually, it's still important, period. But whether the current leader/"voters" agree or understand or not, there should be choice for users.
>
<big snip>
>
> I really hope something changes. In the meantime, I'm personally reverting to > Debian 11 since it still has a few years of support. I am aware of PureOS,
> but the Debian community is still so great, and with 10+ years of
> Debian-devotion/love at this point, I'll stick with the workarounds for as
> long as I can.
>
If you don't add the non-free-firmware repositories to a Debian 11, you
can update to Debian 12 - but that's a complicated way round.
>
With the best will in the world, you could have phrased some of this in
a slightly shorter way - some lines rewrapped to accommodate sense above.
With every good wish, as ever,
Andy Cater
[amacater@debian.org]
Reply to: