This guy took Theo's advice to go elsewhere with this even before the advice was given. He's apparently appointed himself an anti-blob vigilante and has also landed on Alpine and Void Linux. I had an exchange with him on the Alpine forum and tried this:
"Then I suggest that you think hard about what Theo had to say. *You* made the decision to buy a particular bit of hardware. I think it's fair to assume that that means that you want to use it. The hardware we are discussing needs firmware in order to operate. If that firmware is in ROM in the device or in writeable memory in the device, *it needs to be there, or the device won't function*. So in the cases where the memory is writeable, you are really asking that the OS ask you "do you want device A to function or not?". That's a question that doesn't need asking, in my opinion, and won't be asked if the firmware is in ROM (so it's odd to be complaining if the question doesn't get asked when loading the firmware into writeable memory; what difference does it make what kind of memory it's in?). If you were/are concerned about the device's firmware containing backdoors, then either you should have thought about that before buying it, or you should remove the device, if possible, from your system, and replace it with something that makes you happy. Theo is right -- this is an issue created by the end-user by her/his choice of hardware." Didn't work. I doubt that any reasonable argument will. /Don Allen On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 11:04 PM, <li...@wrant.com> wrote: > Fri, 06 Jan 2017 22:45:47 +0100 Martin Hanson <greencopperm...@yandex.com> > > Hi, > > > > I know that we cannot trust the hardware vendors and that all the > > hardware is running firmware on ROMS, except some which are provided > > be the kernel. > > Hi Martin, > > This means you either remove parts you don't trust or power off the system. > Your trust and choice of hardware is yours only personal preferences setup. > > When you start with contradicting statements you can't solve your problems. > Fix yourself up with the parts that you trust and appreciate being happier. > > > However, I fail to understand the reason for this patch: > > > > http://cvsweb.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/distrib/ > miniroot/install.sub?f=h#rev1.654 > > The log says that it "Saves 141 precious bytes on the inside of the media." > There is nothing preventing you from understanding the reason for the diff. > > > It was really nice when OpenBSD asked during installation. > > It is a matter of convenience and optimisation for which the group decided. > You were already told numerous times your request does not change anything. > > It's a question overhead as there is one other obvious choice: break exit. > To do as you were instructed already: remove the offending hardware parts. > > > Yes, it can be argued that since we cannot get any open hardware at > > all it doesn't matter whether the firmware is located on a ROM or if > > it's installed by the kernel, but if we use that logic we might as > > well just use whatever binary driver blob the vendors make for > > everything, right? > > No, it can not be argued. You have gone way beyond any polite useful talk. > Your statements are malformed and do not present the reality but your rant. > > You were told many times your chosen topic is, inappropriately provocative. > You are about 5 years and 2 months late to ask the question publicly again. > > > What have I misunderstood? > > > > Kind regards, > > Martin > > You have misunderstood your complaint to add back the question solves this. > You must carry out your questions to the hardware and firmware vendors now. > > You have asked your questions and they were answered. Now, use your powers > to further your personal development, then report mission success upstream. > > Kind regards, > Anton
