Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #232043 > unrolled thread

Debian install Question

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

Contents

  Debian install Question "M.R.P. zensky" <wintermute24x7@icloud.com> - 2021-02-24 18:50 +0100
    Re: Debian install Question IL Ka <kazakevichilya@gmail.com> - 2021-02-24 19:00 +0100
      Re: Debian install Question Henning Follmann <hfollmann@itcfollmann.com> - 2021-02-24 21:20 +0100
        Re: Debian install Question IL Ka <kazakevichilya@gmail.com> - 2021-02-24 23:40 +0100
          Re: Debian install Question Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2021-02-25 00:00 +0100
          Re: Debian install Question Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2021-02-25 00:40 +0100
            Re: Debian install Question Weaver <weaver@riseup.net> - 2021-02-25 01:50 +0100
              Re: Debian install Question David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2021-02-25 06:00 +0100
                Re: Debian install Question Weaver <weaver@riseup.net> - 2021-02-25 06:10 +0100
                  Re: Debian install Question David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2021-02-26 01:30 +0100
          Re: Debian install Question David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2021-02-25 07:20 +0100
          Re: Debian install Question deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2021-02-25 08:30 +0100
            Re: Debian install Question "Thomas Schmitt" <scdbackup@gmx.net> - 2021-02-25 08:50 +0100
            Re: Debian install Question Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2021-02-25 10:50 +0100
          Re: Debian install Question <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-02-25 12:00 +0100
            Re: Debian install Question Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2021-02-26 13:10 +0100
              Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question] <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-02-26 14:00 +0100
                Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question] Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2021-02-26 19:50 +0100
                  Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question] <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-02-26 21:20 +0100
                    Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question] Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2021-02-26 22:10 +0100
                    Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question] Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2021-02-26 22:30 +0100
                      Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question] Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2021-02-27 00:00 +0100
                        Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question] <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-02-27 09:30 +0100
                        Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question] Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2021-02-28 18:10 +0100
                          Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question] Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2021-02-28 20:20 +0100
                            Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question] Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2021-02-28 20:30 +0100
                              Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question] Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2021-02-28 21:30 +0100
                          Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question] Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2021-03-01 10:40 +0100
                            Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question] Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2021-03-01 14:00 +0100
                            Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question] Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2021-03-01 15:30 +0100
                            Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question] Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2021-03-01 20:20 +0100
                          Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question] rhkramer@gmail.com - 2021-03-01 14:20 +0100
                            Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question] Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2021-03-02 21:00 +0100
                              Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question] rhkramer@gmail.com - 2021-03-02 22:30 +0100
                                Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question] Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2021-03-03 00:30 +0100
                                  Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question] David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2021-03-03 04:10 +0100
                                    Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question] rhkramer@gmail.com - 2021-03-03 16:40 +0100
                                      Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question] Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2021-03-04 11:20 +0100
                                      Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question] David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2021-03-04 18:50 +0100
                                        Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question] Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2021-03-04 21:50 +0100
                                          Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question] Steve McIntyre <steve@einval.com> - 2021-03-05 02:00 +0100
                                        Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question] rhkramer@gmail.com - 2021-03-04 21:50 +0100
                                          Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question] David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2021-03-05 18:00 +0100
                                            Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question] rhkramer@gmail.com - 2021-03-05 20:40 +0100
                                              Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question] David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2021-03-06 02:50 +0100
                                                Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question] rhkramer@gmail.com - 2021-03-06 04:30 +0100
                                      Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question] David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2021-03-04 18:50 +0100
                                    Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question] Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2021-03-03 21:10 +0100
                                  Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question] rhkramer@gmail.com - 2021-03-03 16:30 +0100
                                    Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question] Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2021-03-03 21:20 +0100
                                      Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question] rhkramer@gmail.com - 2021-03-03 22:50 +0100
                                        Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question] Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2021-03-04 00:20 +0100
                                          Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question] rhkramer@gmail.com - 2021-03-04 04:30 +0100
                  Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question] Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2021-02-28 16:40 +0100
          Re: Debian install Question Henning Follmann <hfollmann@itcfollmann.com> - 2021-02-25 14:00 +0100
        Re: Debian install Question Anssi Saari <as@sci.fi> - 2021-02-25 17:40 +0100
          Re: Debian install Question Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2021-02-25 17:50 +0100
          Re: Debian install Question Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2021-02-26 13:20 +0100
            Re: Debian install Question Anssi Saari <as@sci.fi> - 2021-02-26 17:50 +0100
    Re: Debian install Question David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2021-02-24 19:20 +0100

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

#232171 — Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question]

tomas@tuxteam.de wrote: 
> On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 06:41:40PM +0000, Brian wrote:
> 
> [...]
> 
> > A 64-bit netinstall is prominent on the Debian main page. The
> > problem with that image is that it is unlikely to suit many users
> > with wireless-only connectivity. No obvious escape route is
> > advertised. Yes, I know - if a site search is conducted, a better
> > (non-free) image will be located. Jumping through hoops comes to
> > mind!
> 
> No easy solution to that, sigh.

Sure there is -- add a link directly underneath it saying "if
you require wireless connectivity during the installation, you
may need to use this [link: alternate installer]."

-dsr-

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232174 — Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question]

On Fri 26 Feb 2021 at 16:28:56 -0500, Dan Ritter wrote:

> tomas@tuxteam.de wrote: 
> > On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 06:41:40PM +0000, Brian wrote:
> > 
> > [...]
> > 
> > > A 64-bit netinstall is prominent on the Debian main page. The
> > > problem with that image is that it is unlikely to suit many users
> > > with wireless-only connectivity. No obvious escape route is
> > > advertised. Yes, I know - if a site search is conducted, a better
> > > (non-free) image will be located. Jumping through hoops comes to
> > > mind!
> > 
> > No easy solution to that, sigh.
> 
> Sure there is -- add a link directly underneath it saying "if
> you require wireless connectivity during the installation, you
> may need to use this [link: alternate installer]."

"if you require wireless connectivity during the installation, we
have a much better installer for you. [link: alternate installer]."

(Don't ask ask why the inferior installer is prominent :).)

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232176 — Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question]

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 10:49:58PM +0000, Brian wrote:
> On Fri 26 Feb 2021 at 16:28:56 -0500, Dan Ritter wrote:
> 
> > tomas@tuxteam.de wrote: 
> > > On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 06:41:40PM +0000, Brian wrote:
> > > 
> > > [...]
> > > 
> > > > A 64-bit netinstall is prominent on the Debian main page. The
> > > > problem with that image is that it is unlikely to suit many users
> > > > with wireless-only connectivity. No obvious escape route is
> > > > advertised. Yes, I know - if a site search is conducted, a better
> > > > (non-free) image will be located. Jumping through hoops comes to
> > > > mind!
> > > 
> > > No easy solution to that, sigh.
> > 
> > Sure there is -- add a link directly underneath it saying "if
> > you require wireless connectivity during the installation, you
> > may need to use this [link: alternate installer]."
> 
> "if you require wireless connectivity during the installation, we
> have a much better installer for you. [link: alternate installer]."
> 
> (Don't ask ask why the inferior installer is prominent :).)
   ^^^^^

That surely is a typo. You meant "Do ask why ..."-

Cheers
 - t

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232210 — Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question]

On Fri, 26 Feb 2021 22:49:58 +0000
Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> wrote:

> On Fri 26 Feb 2021 at 16:28:56 -0500, Dan Ritter wrote:
> 
> > tomas@tuxteam.de wrote: 
> > > On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 06:41:40PM +0000, Brian wrote:
> > > 
> > > [...]
> > > 
> > > > A 64-bit netinstall is prominent on the Debian main page. The
> > > > problem with that image is that it is unlikely to suit many users
> > > > with wireless-only connectivity. No obvious escape route is
> > > > advertised. Yes, I know - if a site search is conducted, a better
> > > > (non-free) image will be located. Jumping through hoops comes to
> > > > mind!
> > > 
> > > No easy solution to that, sigh.
> > 
> > Sure there is -- add a link directly underneath it saying "if
> > you require wireless connectivity during the installation, you
> > may need to use this [link: alternate installer]."
> 
> "if you require wireless connectivity during the installation, we
> have a much better installer for you. [link: alternate installer]."
> 
> (Don't ask ask why the inferior installer is prominent :).)

Snark aside, what's wrong with something like this:

"Many wireless network cards (and even some wired ones) require
non-free firmware to function properly. This firmware is not included
in the standard installation images, due to Debian's free software
ideals. If the network hardware your installation will rely upon
requires such firmware, you may consider using the alternate non-free
installation images available here."

Celejar

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232213 — Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question]

On Sun 28 Feb 2021 at 12:03:31 -0500, Celejar wrote:

> On Fri, 26 Feb 2021 22:49:58 +0000
> Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> wrote:
> 
> > On Fri 26 Feb 2021 at 16:28:56 -0500, Dan Ritter wrote:
> > 
> > > tomas@tuxteam.de wrote: 
> > > > On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 06:41:40PM +0000, Brian wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > [...]
> > > > 
> > > > > A 64-bit netinstall is prominent on the Debian main page. The
> > > > > problem with that image is that it is unlikely to suit many users
> > > > > with wireless-only connectivity. No obvious escape route is
> > > > > advertised. Yes, I know - if a site search is conducted, a better
> > > > > (non-free) image will be located. Jumping through hoops comes to
> > > > > mind!
> > > > 
> > > > No easy solution to that, sigh.
> > > 
> > > Sure there is -- add a link directly underneath it saying "if
> > > you require wireless connectivity during the installation, you
> > > may need to use this [link: alternate installer]."
> > 
> > "if you require wireless connectivity during the installation, we
> > have a much better installer for you. [link: alternate installer]."
> > 
> > (Don't ask ask why the inferior installer is prominent :).)
> 
> Snark aside, what's wrong with something like this:
> 
> "Many wireless network cards (and even some wired ones) require
> non-free firmware to function properly. This firmware is not included
> in the standard installation images, due to Debian's free software
> ideals. If the network hardware your installation will rely upon
> requires such firmware, you may consider using the alternate non-free
> installation images available here."

Submitted as a bug against www.debian.org, it could fly. However,
the word "standard" seems superfluous. It implies the existemce of
non-standard (non-free?) installer images and these, of course,
would not be capable of distribution. Bear in mind there is only
one true installer.

As for "alternate"; how can a non-free image be an alternative to
a free one and be promoted for download on the Debian main page?

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232214 — Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question]

On Sun, 28 Feb 2021 19:11:51 +0000
Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> wrote:

> On Sun 28 Feb 2021 at 12:03:31 -0500, Celejar wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, 26 Feb 2021 22:49:58 +0000
> > Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Fri 26 Feb 2021 at 16:28:56 -0500, Dan Ritter wrote:
> > > 
> > > > tomas@tuxteam.de wrote: 
> > > > > On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 06:41:40PM +0000, Brian wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > [...]
> > > > > 
> > > > > > A 64-bit netinstall is prominent on the Debian main page. The
> > > > > > problem with that image is that it is unlikely to suit many users
> > > > > > with wireless-only connectivity. No obvious escape route is
> > > > > > advertised. Yes, I know - if a site search is conducted, a better
> > > > > > (non-free) image will be located. Jumping through hoops comes to
> > > > > > mind!
> > > > > 
> > > > > No easy solution to that, sigh.
> > > > 
> > > > Sure there is -- add a link directly underneath it saying "if
> > > > you require wireless connectivity during the installation, you
> > > > may need to use this [link: alternate installer]."
> > > 
> > > "if you require wireless connectivity during the installation, we
> > > have a much better installer for you. [link: alternate installer]."
> > > 
> > > (Don't ask ask why the inferior installer is prominent :).)
> > 
> > Snark aside, what's wrong with something like this:
> > 
> > "Many wireless network cards (and even some wired ones) require
> > non-free firmware to function properly. This firmware is not included
> > in the standard installation images, due to Debian's free software
> > ideals. If the network hardware your installation will rely upon
> > requires such firmware, you may consider using the alternate non-free
> > installation images available here."
> 
> Submitted as a bug against www.debian.org, it could fly. However,
> the word "standard" seems superfluous. It implies the existemce of
> non-standard (non-free?) installer images and these, of course,
> would not be capable of distribution. Bear in mind there is only

I don't think I really understand your points - as per others posts in
this thread, there are certainly things that are entirely "capable of
distribution" but Debian still will not include in the standard
installation (for reasons that I completely respect). This is exactly
what the "unofficial" images are - they contain "proprietary but
redistributable firmware," and Debian is willing to distribute them
from project architecture, just not as a "standard" (my term) installer:

https://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/unofficial/non-free/cd-including-firmware/

> one true installer.
> 
> As for "alternate"; how can a non-free image be an alternative to
> a free one and be promoted for download on the Debian main page?

Celejar

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232215 — Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question]

On Sun 28 Feb 2021 at 14:27:24 -0500, Celejar wrote:

> On Sun, 28 Feb 2021 19:11:51 +0000
> Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> wrote:
> 
> > On Sun 28 Feb 2021 at 12:03:31 -0500, Celejar wrote:
> > 
> > > On Fri, 26 Feb 2021 22:49:58 +0000
> > > Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > On Fri 26 Feb 2021 at 16:28:56 -0500, Dan Ritter wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > tomas@tuxteam.de wrote: 
> > > > > > On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 06:41:40PM +0000, Brian wrote:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > [...]
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > A 64-bit netinstall is prominent on the Debian main page. The
> > > > > > > problem with that image is that it is unlikely to suit many users
> > > > > > > with wireless-only connectivity. No obvious escape route is
> > > > > > > advertised. Yes, I know - if a site search is conducted, a better
> > > > > > > (non-free) image will be located. Jumping through hoops comes to
> > > > > > > mind!
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > No easy solution to that, sigh.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Sure there is -- add a link directly underneath it saying "if
> > > > > you require wireless connectivity during the installation, you
> > > > > may need to use this [link: alternate installer]."
> > > > 
> > > > "if you require wireless connectivity during the installation, we
> > > > have a much better installer for you. [link: alternate installer]."
> > > > 
> > > > (Don't ask ask why the inferior installer is prominent :).)
> > > 
> > > Snark aside, what's wrong with something like this:
> > > 
> > > "Many wireless network cards (and even some wired ones) require
> > > non-free firmware to function properly. This firmware is not included
> > > in the standard installation images, due to Debian's free software
> > > ideals. If the network hardware your installation will rely upon
> > > requires such firmware, you may consider using the alternate non-free
> > > installation images available here."
> > 
> > Submitted as a bug against www.debian.org, it could fly. However,
> > the word "standard" seems superfluous. It implies the existemce of
> > non-standard (non-free?) installer images and these, of course,
> > would not be capable of distribution. Bear in mind there is only
> 
> I don't think I really understand your points - as per others posts in
> this thread, there are certainly things that are entirely "capable of
> distribution" but Debian still will not include in the standard
> installation (for reasons that I completely respect). This is exactly
> what the "unofficial" images are - they contain "proprietary but
> redistributable firmware," and Debian is willing to distribute them
> from project architecture, just not as a "standard" (my term) installer:
> 
> https://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/unofficial/non-free/cd-including-firmware/

Presumabely, this space

  https://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/unofficial/

could contain as many packages as there are developers willing to
commit packages there, free or non-free. Or is it reserved only for
the specific images we are discussing? In the case of installer
images, could there be many official "non-official" offerings?

It is as well to note that non-free is not considered to be part of
Debian:

  https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-archive.html

Your patch to the main web page could be submitted. I acknowledge the
visibilty issue. Whether the suggestion is accepted or not might 
clarify things.

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232228 — Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question]

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Du, 28 feb 21, 12:03:31, Celejar wrote:
> 
> Snark aside, what's wrong with something like this:
> 
> "Many wireless network cards (and even some wired ones) require
> non-free firmware to function properly. This firmware is not included
> in the standard installation images, due to Debian's free software
> ideals. If the network hardware your installation will rely upon
> requires such firmware, you may consider using the alternate non-free
> installation images available here."

For those who didn't visit the Debian website recently, following the 
discussion on debian-devel this is now two clicks away from the home 
page (-> More... -> Download: More variants of Debian images):

https://www.debian.org/distrib/

    If any of the hardware in your system requires non-free firmware to 
    be loaded with the device driver, you can use one of the tarballs of 
    common firmware packages or download an unofficial image including 
    these non-free firmwares.
    
    Instructions how to use the tarballs and general information about 
    loading firmware during an installation can be found in the 
    Installation Guide.

    unofficial installation images for "stable" with firmware included


Kind regards,
Andrei
-- 
http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232233 — Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question]

[Fixed top-posting.]

On Mon, 01 Mar 2021 10:23:51 +0000
David Goodenough <david.goodenough@btconnect.com> wrote:

> On Monday, 1 March 2021 09:29:57 GMT Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> > On Du, 28 feb 21, 12:03:31, Celejar wrote:
> > > Snark aside, what's wrong with something like this:
> > > 
> > > "Many wireless network cards (and even some wired ones) require
> > > non-free firmware to function properly. This firmware is not included
> > > in the standard installation images, due to Debian's free software
> > > ideals. If the network hardware your installation will rely upon
> > > requires such firmware, you may consider using the alternate non-free
> > > installation images available here."
> > 
> > For those who didn't visit the Debian website recently, following the
> > discussion on debian-devel this is now two clicks away from the home
> > page (-> More... -> Download: More variants of Debian images):
> > 
> > https://www.debian.org/distrib/
> > 
> >     If any of the hardware in your system requires non-free firmware to
> >     be loaded with the device driver, you can use one of the tarballs of
> >     common firmware packages or download an unofficial image including
> >     these non-free firmwares.
> > 
> >     Instructions how to use the tarballs and general information about
> >     loading firmware during an installation can be found in the
> >     Installation Guide.
> > 
> >     unofficial installation images for "stable" with firmware included

> How is a naive user meant to know whether his hardware required non-free firmware?  
> The only route that seems to be given by this wording is that they install (or try to install) 
> the system using the official image, and then have to work out for themselves what does 
> not work, and from that which unofficial image to use.  
> 
> Could the installer not help here by identifying hardware it can not support but which an 
> unofficial image does support and point the user in the right 
> direction?  Yes the knowledge of which hardware exists changes over time, and after the 
> installer is built, but if the unofficial images had machine readable descriptors on the 
> debian web site of what they support (which would be updated each time a new image 
> was added) then the installer could consult this and thus be able to give the best available 
> advice.

It's even worse than that - as I reported here:

https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=895258

in at least some cases, if NIC firmware is missing, the installer will
simply display the rather unhelpful message: "Network configuration
failure," with no hint of what the problem might actually be. A savvy user
will know to look in the logs, where the problem is made quite clear,
but the installer itself could certainly do with some improvement.

Celejar

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232244 — Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question]

On Mon 01 Mar 2021 at 10:23:51 +0000, David Goodenough wrote:

> How is a naive user meant to know whether his hardware required
> non-free firmware?

That's a very tricky one to give a definitive answer to. It possibly
depends on the quality and quantity of research done by the user.
Howerever, the user has to get an ISO from somewhere and could come
across the text that Andrei quotes. If difficulties are encountered,
returning there to get another image is an option.

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232248 — Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question]

On Mon 01 Mar 2021 at 11:29:57 +0200, Andrei POPESCU wrote:

> On Du, 28 feb 21, 12:03:31, Celejar wrote:
> > 
> > Snark aside, what's wrong with something like this:
> > 
> > "Many wireless network cards (and even some wired ones) require
> > non-free firmware to function properly. This firmware is not included
> > in the standard installation images, due to Debian's free software
> > ideals. If the network hardware your installation will rely upon
> > requires such firmware, you may consider using the alternate non-free
> > installation images available here."
> 
> For those who didn't visit the Debian website recently, following the 
> discussion on debian-devel this is now two clicks away from the home 
> page (-> More... -> Download: More variants of Debian images):
> 
> https://www.debian.org/distrib/
> 
>     If any of the hardware in your system requires non-free firmware to 
>     be loaded with the device driver, you can use one of the tarballs of 
>     common firmware packages or download an unofficial image including 
>     these non-free firmwares.
>     
>     Instructions how to use the tarballs and general information about 
>     loading firmware during an installation can be found in the 
>     Installation Guide.
> 
>     unofficial installation images for "stable" with firmware included

The page https://www.debian.org/distrib/ is entitled "Getting Debian".
And what is Debian? asks a user. The answer is at

  https://www.debian.org/intro/philosophy

  > The Debian Project is an association of individuals who have made
  > common cause to create a **free** operating system.

(Emphasis is mine).

Then, at the bottom of https://www.debian.org/distrib/, we see an advert
to download an unofficial image of the installer. "unofficial" is mealy-
mouthed. What is meant is "non-free". What it says is "Hey, we have a
better installation image for you but we had to sneak it in here because
of the Debian thing" :).

The Installer is the Jewel in the Crown of Debian. Tainting it and having
it competing is a new development. I am all for being pragmatic, but
usurping the Installer's status appears a step too far.

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232237 — Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question]

On Sunday, February 28, 2021 12:03:31 PM Celejar wrote:
> "Many wireless network cards (and even some wired ones) require
> non-free firmware to function properly. This firmware is not included
> in the standard installation images, due to Debian's free software
> ideals. If the network hardware your installation will rely upon
> requires such firmware, you may consider using the alternate non-free
> installation images available here."

+1

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232277 — Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question]

On Mon 01 Mar 2021 at 08:13:13 -0500, rhkramer@gmail.com wrote:

> On Sunday, February 28, 2021 12:03:31 PM Celejar wrote:
> > "Many wireless network cards (and even some wired ones) require
> > non-free firmware to function properly. This firmware is not included
> > in the standard installation images, due to Debian's free software
> > ideals. If the network hardware your installation will rely upon
> > requires such firmware, you may consider using the alternate non-free
> > installation images available here."
> 
> +1

"+1" for what? Advertising each and every non-Debian installer that
comes along and is uploaded to unofficial?

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232282 — Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question]

On Tuesday, March 02, 2021 02:55:08 PM Brian wrote:
> On Mon 01 Mar 2021 at 08:13:13 -0500, rhkramer@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Sunday, February 28, 2021 12:03:31 PM Celejar wrote:
> > > "Many wireless network cards (and even some wired ones) require
> > > non-free firmware to function properly. This firmware is not included
> > > in the standard installation images, due to Debian's free software
> > > ideals. If the network hardware your installation will rely upon
> > > requires such firmware, you may consider using the alternate non-free
> > > installation images available here."
> > 
> > +1
> 
> "+1" for what? Advertising each and every non-Debian installer that
> comes along and is uploaded to unofficial?

No.  Providing a reasonable explanatory text about why some other installer 
may be required and a link to a place where you can find one or more.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232290 — Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question]

On Tue 02 Mar 2021 at 16:19:45 -0500, rhkramer@gmail.com wrote:

> On Tuesday, March 02, 2021 02:55:08 PM Brian wrote:
> > On Mon 01 Mar 2021 at 08:13:13 -0500, rhkramer@gmail.com wrote:
> > > On Sunday, February 28, 2021 12:03:31 PM Celejar wrote:
> > > > "Many wireless network cards (and even some wired ones) require
> > > > non-free firmware to function properly. This firmware is not included
> > > > in the standard installation images, due to Debian's free software
> > > > ideals. If the network hardware your installation will rely upon
> > > > requires such firmware, you may consider using the alternate non-free
> > > > installation images available here."
> > > 
> > > +1
> > 
> > "+1" for what? Advertising each and every non-Debian installer that
> > comes along and is uploaded to unofficial?
> 
> No.  Providing a reasonable explanatory text about why some other installer 
> may be required and a link to a place where you can find one or more.

My installer is aimed at users with an adapter that uses the p54usb
driver. It requires firmware that needs to be extracted from the device
and there aren't any such files in the non-free archive. I imagine there
are other similar devices.

I can easlily provide explanatory text about why my installer is needed
and why it would benefit users. Would it be ok to have it in unofficial
as a non-Debian installer?

Just a thought!

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232300 — Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question]

On Tue 02 Mar 2021 at 23:29:15 (+0000), Brian wrote:
> On Tue 02 Mar 2021 at 16:19:45 -0500, rhkramer@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Tuesday, March 02, 2021 02:55:08 PM Brian wrote:
> > > On Mon 01 Mar 2021 at 08:13:13 -0500, rhkramer@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > On Sunday, February 28, 2021 12:03:31 PM Celejar wrote:
> > > > > "Many wireless network cards (and even some wired ones) require
> > > > > non-free firmware to function properly. This firmware is not included
> > > > > in the standard installation images, due to Debian's free software
> > > > > ideals. If the network hardware your installation will rely upon
> > > > > requires such firmware, you may consider using the alternate non-free
> > > > > installation images available here."
> > > > 
> > > > +1
> > > 
> > > "+1" for what? Advertising each and every non-Debian installer that
> > > comes along and is uploaded to unofficial?

I was under the impression that "The Debian Images Team is a small
team of people working on creating, testing and distributing Debian
images for [us]", whereas you seem to be describing something like
a wiki where any Tom, Dick or Harry dumps their cobbled together
installer.

> > No.  Providing a reasonable explanatory text about why some other installer 
> > may be required and a link to a place where you can find one or more.
> 
> My installer is aimed at users with an adapter that uses the p54usb
> driver. It requires firmware that needs to be extracted from the device
> and there aren't any such files in the non-free archive. I imagine there
> are other similar devices.
> 
> I can easlily provide explanatory text about why my installer is needed
> and why it would benefit users. Would it be ok to have it in unofficial
> as a non-Debian installer?

Extracting firmware from the device itself is something I've never had
to do, and wouldn't know where to get started. That might be the sort
of process to describe in the Firmware wiki, under "Location of
firmware files".

Having extracted it, the "naive" user might then follow the
instructions in the Installation Guide, of course, and then wonder
why the d-i wouldn't find and load it.

Cheers,
David.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232312 — Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question]

On Tuesday, March 02, 2021 10:01:09 PM David Wright wrote:
> I was under the impression that "The Debian Images Team is a small
> team of people working on creating, testing and distributing Debian
> images for [us]", whereas you seem to be describing something like
> a wiki where any Tom, Dick or Harry dumps their cobbled together
> installer.

Well, until and unless some person or group tries to vet those Debian 
installation images, that may be the best that can be done.  

It would be nicer if there was some person or group that tried to vet them, or 
maybe even suggesting that something like a requirement that at least one 
other person attest that an installation image worked for them (on the target 
hardware).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232346 — Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question]

On 2021-03-03, rhkramer@gmail.com <rhkramer@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 02, 2021 10:01:09 PM David Wright wrote:
>> I was under the impression that "The Debian Images Team is a small
>> team of people working on creating, testing and distributing Debian
>> images for [us]", whereas you seem to be describing something like
>> a wiki where any Tom, Dick or Harry dumps their cobbled together
>> installer.
>
> Well, until and unless some person or group tries to vet those Debian 
> installation images, that may be the best that can be done.  
>
> It would be nicer if there was some person or group that tried to vet them, or 
> maybe even suggesting that something like a requirement that at least one 
> other person attest that an installation image worked for them (on the target 
> hardware).

It's when you don't know what you don't know that you need to know it.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232363 — Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question]

On Wed 03 Mar 2021 at 10:36:42 (-0500), rhkramer@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 02, 2021 10:01:09 PM David Wright wrote:

Brian wrote: '"+1" for what? Advertising each and every non-Debian
installer that comes along and is uploaded to unofficial?'

> > I was under the impression that "The Debian Images Team is a small
> > team of people working on creating, testing and distributing Debian
> > images for [us]", whereas you seem to be describing something like
> > a wiki where any Tom, Dick or Harry dumps their cobbled together
> > installer.
> 
> Well, until and unless some person or group tries to vet those Debian 
> installation images, that may be the best that can be done.  

You cut the context. They wouldn't be "Debian installation images",
but "non-Debian installers", as quoted above.

I don't want non-Debian installers on cdimage.debian.org, official
or unofficial. Do bear in mind that the debian-installer in the
official image is the same debian-installer as in the unofficial
image. The latter image just contains some extra files, almost
all of which originate from the kernel team or Debian.

What I did suggest go into a wiki was the *method* of extracting
firmware from a particular driver. I notice that there is already
one fwcutter in my unofficial image (for Broadcom B54xx), but
I don't know how it works, nor whether it works in the same way
as one for the p54usb would.

> It would be nicer if there was some person or group that tried to vet them, or 
> maybe even suggesting that something like a requirement that at least one 
> other person attest that an installation image worked for them (on the target 
> hardware).

AIUI the Debian Install System Team build the Debian installer, and
the aforementioned Debian Images Team put it into the unofficial
images, along with some extra .debs and a couple of Packages files.
So I'm not sure I understand exactly what this person/group would
be expected to vet.

Cheers,
David.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232368 — Re: Non-free firmware [was: Debian install Question]

On Thu 04 Mar 2021 at 11:40:00 -0600, David Wright wrote:

> On Wed 03 Mar 2021 at 10:36:42 (-0500), rhkramer@gmail.com wrote:
> 
> > It would be nicer if there was some person or group that tried to vet them, or 
> > maybe even suggesting that something like a requirement that at least one 
> > other person attest that an installation image worked for them (on the target 
> > hardware).
> 
> AIUI the Debian Install System Team build the Debian installer, and

That's certainly correct. The effort put into this deserves to be better
appreciated. They provide a free installer of high quality.

> the aforementioned Debian Images Team put it into the unofficial
> images, along with some extra .debs and a couple of Packages files.
> So I'm not sure I understand exactly what this person/group would
> be expected to vet.

I am less sure that the Debian Images Team interact wih unofficial.
I'd be inclined to say that the conribution in unofficial is from a
DD, who may or not be part of the installer team. It is "unofficail"
after all.

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web