I agree that there should be a scan ran to inform the system user that binary firmware is needed at boot, but likewise, if the system needs it, it should be an offered option at installation time also, just not offered by default as enabled. The user must at least select the option to install firmware such as this for example: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [ ] Install optional kernel binary firmware - Kernel firmware is used by some modern devices to supplement EEPROMs and other mask roms normally included either with the driver internally, or on the device itself. Package (optional) : linux-kernel-firmware-nonfree-<insert git pull date>-noarch-.deb Notes: Selecting this option will not install any traditional non-free software packages (I.E. Adobe Flashplayer) on your system. This package is meant to only supplement the Linux kernel and it's drivers. Nothing else. Due to the fact certain kernel drivers lack this firmware internally and on chip, this package may be needed to gain full functionality of hardware such as VGA, Audio, SCSI, Networking, and other devices. If you were presented with a warning at boot that firmware needed to be loaded for your device(s), select and install this package, otherwise it is safe to continue without it. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Just a passing thought. As shown, the option is disabled by default, has documentational notes, and is counted as an optional kernel package, not actual software. Good idea? Bad idea? Needs work? The cat ate the mouse? The dish ran away with the spoon? -Jim Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2015 21:52:20 -0400 From: jud...@gmail.com To: dan...@centurion.net.nz CC: dng@lists.dyne.org Subject: Re: [Dng] straw poll, non-free firmware for installers On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 9:29 PM, Daniel Reurich <dan...@centurion.net.nz> wrote: Ok, That was interesting.... Here's my thinking on the how and the why. definition of terms: user = the person using the installer to install Devuan. module = linux kernel module. hardware = reference to the particular chipset(s) in scope, be they SoC or plug in cards or devices. firmware = non-free binary blob that is required to be loaded by the standard kernel module for the hardware in scope in order for the hardware to operate. essential: required for proper operation. How: **** I will build a (udeb) package called firmware-reqd that: 1) Will provide an early detection of a select list of common essential hardware that: a) requires a non-free firmware blob b) is essential to make the system use-able enough to complete the installation to a bootable state. 2) Upon detection of said hardware, I will provide a prompt informing the user about the specific piece(s) of hardware detected that require non-free firmware to and give them the option to load that firmware and continue the installation or abort it at that point. 3) Only firmware meeting the above criteria will be included in the iso, but not used or loaded unless the operator specifically chooses to do so. 4) The choice to use non-free firmware will naturally lead to the question about whether the related firmware deb packages should be installed during the install. I could provide an option here, defaulting to yes but allowing deselection for those who may want to leverage the non-free firmware only during install but not on the running system. Note: When non-free firmware udebs are installed by debconf my understanding is that each of them will present the user a license upon which is also required to be accepted before that udeb is installed. **** Why this approach: I agree in principle about using strictly free/libre open source software, and where I have the choice I personaly will select hardware that aligns with those principles. However, I would not want my choices to become the tool that would punish those less informed, or unable to make the sacrifices required to comply entirely with that principle. To do so would be ungracious and unrealistic, and boils down to elitism and puritanism. Nevertheless, to silently let the installation of non-free firmware be done without recognition and challenge is not right either. So I see the most gracious approach is to inform the users and grant them the opportunity to choose how they would like to proceed. It gives opportunity for those who for conscience sake would refuse non-free firmware to do so, whilst not enforcing that choice an all users. I think that this is a reasonable approach, and once the above proposed package is ready, it is my intention to have it included in the official installer images we ship. Anyone that strongly objects can re-build their own installers without the non-free firmware packages added. I like this approach as well as Nextime's. I generally favor approaches that help the users make informed decisions, but otherwise don't get in their way of them doing what they want with their computers. I can help out with steps 1 and 2, if you're interested. There's lots of overlap with my work on vdev. Thank you for all the hard work you've put into getting the Devuan installer ready!-Jude On 03/06/15 20:37, Daniel Reurich wrote: Hi, I'd like a straw poll on whether we should include non-free firmware in our installers by default. It's a deviation from Debians traditional position, but a pragmatic one that shows we care about the end users. Keen for feedback. -- Daniel Reurich Centurion Computer Technology (2005) Ltd. 021 797 722 _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
_______________________________________________ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
