Dear Sean,
Le 04/12/2017 à 21:47, Sean Whitton a écrit :
Hello,
On Mon, Dec 04 2017, Thibaut Paumard wrote:
I vote for:
1- putting the non-free firmware on all our images,
This seems more controversial than it needs to be, and misses an
opportunity for us to express our values.
Why are
Am 04.12.2017 um 21:47 schrieb Sean Whitton:
> Hello,
>
> On Mon, Dec 04 2017, Thibaut Paumard wrote:
>
>> I vote for:
>>1- putting the non-free firmware on all our images,
>
> This seems more controversial than it needs to be, and misses an
> opportunity for us to express our values.
>
> W
Am 05.12.2017 um 10:19 schrieb Thibaut Paumard:
> Dear Sean,
>
> Le 04/12/2017 à 21:47, Sean Whitton a écrit :
>> Hello,
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 04 2017, Thibaut Paumard wrote:
>>
>>> I vote for:
>>> 1- putting the non-free firmware on all our images,
>>
>> This seems more controversial than it need
On 2017-12-05 10:33, Jonas Meurer wrote:
> 2. Apart from that, we should improve support and documentation for
>loading non-free firmware from an external medium in the free
>installer.
The combination of the free installer plus nonfree firmware on a
USB memory is not so bad. The problem i
El 05/12/17 a las 10:19, Thibaut Paumard escribió:
> Dear Sean,
>
> Le 04/12/2017 à 21:47, Sean Whitton a écrit :
> > Hello,
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 04 2017, Thibaut Paumard wrote:
> >
> > > I vote for:
> > > 1- putting the non-free firmware on all our images,
> >
> > This seems more controvers
Am 05.12.2017 um 06:02 schrieb Paul Wise:
> On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 6:18 AM, Philipp Kern wrote:
>> On 04.12.2017 19:03, Holger Levsen wrote:
>>> yes, I also agree this would work and be better than the status-quo.
>>> however I'm inclined to believe doing this and adding a fourth repo,
>>> non-free
Dear Jonas,
Le 05/12/2017 à 10:39, Jonas Meurer a écrit :
On Mon, Dec 04 2017, Thibaut Paumard wrote:
I vote for:
1- putting the non-free firmware on all our images,
This seems more controversial than it needs to be, and misses an
opportunity for us to express our values.
[...]
I also
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: "Dr. Tobias Quathamer"
* Package name: golang-github-golang-glog
Version : 0.0~git20160126.23def4e-1
Upstream Author : Go Authors, Michael Stapelberg
* URL : https://github.com/golang/glog
* License : Apache-2.0
Program
On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 08:04:47AM +0100, Jonas Meurer wrote:
Am 05.12.2017 um 05:34 schrieb Paul Wise:
On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 12:34 AM, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
Yes, I've never managed to get d-i to find firmware I've put on a USB
myself, and always resorted to this approach. I never got aroun
On Mon, Dec 04, 2017 at 03:57:11PM +0100, Thibaut Paumard wrote:
> I vote for:
> 1- putting the non-free firmware on all our images,
> 2- let the installer check whether they are needed,
> 3- if yes, let the user decide:
I agree with this. While I also believe non-free firmware should not b
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Vincent Bernat
* Package name: golang-github-dgryski-go-farm
Version : 0.0~git20171119.ac7624ea8da3-1
Upstream Author : Damian Gryski
* URL : https://github.com/dgryski/go-farm
* License : Expat
Programming Lang: Go
D
On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 04:50:59PM +0100, Guus Sliepen wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 04, 2017 at 03:57:11PM +0100, Thibaut Paumard wrote:
>
> > I vote for:
> > 1- putting the non-free firmware on all our images,
> > 2- let the installer check whether they are needed,
> > 3- if yes, let the user decid
Le lundi, 4 décembre 2017, 23.18:21 h CET Philipp Kern a écrit :
> On 04.12.2017 19:03, Holger Levsen wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 04, 2017 at 05:36:30PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> >> Lars Wirzenius writes:
> >>> Myself, I would prefer us to keep both the free-software-only ISO and
> >>> the non-free IS
On 05.12.2017 10:33, Jonas Meurer wrote:
> 3. We should consider the a firmware subsection to non-free in our
>repositories. This would allow users to use non-free firmware while
>not adding sources for other non-free software on their systems.
>
> Cheers
> jonas
I see this a little bit d
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Lubomir Rintel
* Package name: ioport
Version : 1.2
Upstream Author : Richard Jones
* URL : http://people.redhat.com/rjones/ioport/
* License : GPLv2+
Programming Lang: C
Description : direct access to I/O ports
On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 05:44:57PM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote:
> > > 1- putting the non-free firmware on all our images,
> > > 2- let the installer check whether they are needed,
> > > 3- if yes, let the user decide:
> >
> > I agree with this. While I also believe non-free firmware should n
Alf Gaida writes:
> I see this a little bit different - hell, no! - non-free is non-free and
> the pure existence of a line
> http://ftp.debian.org/debian $distribution main contrib non-free
> will not pollute a system with not wanted non-free packages. Afaik it
> needs a
> apt install $list_o
Hello Thibaut,
On Tue, Dec 05 2017, Thibaut Paumard wrote:
> I also believe this should be less controversial. I don't see any
> problem with shipping non-free firmware on our main installation media
> as long as they are redistributable, because I don't consider them
> part of the OS. The user h
Hello,
On Tue, Dec 05 2017, Adam Borowski wrote:
> Thus: I'd say we should prominently offer two downloads, one with a
> paragraph of insults.
Uncontroversial suggestion:
List the fully free ISO first, have it coloured green, blue etc., and
the ISO with non-free firmware second, coloured red, y
Congratulations!
El mar., 5 de dic. de 2017 a la(s) 20:27, Matthieu Caneill <
matthieu...@debian.org> escribió:
> Dear developers,
>
> We're happy to announce that Debsources, the Web application that
> allows to browse and search the entire source code of all Debian
> releases, is now hosted on
On 2017-12-06 00:00:12 +0100 (+0100), Guus Sliepen wrote:
[...]
> Just say that non-free firmware is provided as-is and does not
> allow modifications to fix bugs or add functionality, in contrast
> with the vast majority of the software in Debian, which does
> guarantee those properties.
[...]
Ho
On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 1:46 AM, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
> * splitting non-free in subsets;
> * adding a non-free-firmware area;
I think we don't want either of these, instead we should *add*
additional Packages files for each of the classes of non-free things
that people want to be able to is
On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 7:00 AM, Guus Sliepen wrote:
> In my eyes, that is just moving the choice to an earlier point in time
> when the user might not have enough information to make the decision,
> for example because of brand new hardware. But, having two installers
> side by side is a very good
On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 12:00:12AM +0100, Guus Sliepen wrote:
I have no illusions that a competitor to x86 will magically be more free.
Since the majority of non-x86 systems available today can't even display
a modern graphical desktop without a non-free blob, that seems like a
safe bet.
Mi
On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 05:08:26PM -0700, Sean Whitton wrote:
Hello,
On Tue, Dec 05 2017, Adam Borowski wrote:
Thus: I'd say we should prominently offer two downloads, one with a
paragraph of insults.
Uncontroversial suggestion:
List the fully free ISO first, have it coloured green, blue et
On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 11:02:09AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
non-redistributable entirely. By enhancing win32-loader (and creating
similar tools for distros/Android/macOS) and promoting that as the
primary install mechanism for Debian, we can detect the firmware
requirements of the current system a
On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 11:43 AM, Michael Stone wrote:
> Since the majority of non-x86 systems available today can't even display a
> modern graphical desktop without a non-free blob, that seems like a safe
> bet.
The majority of non-x86 systems available today can't even install
Debian at all due
On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 11:52 AM, Michael Stone wrote:
> you want debian to be uninstallable on some hardware without a copy of
> windows? that doesn't seem like a step forward or even a desirable goal.
Of course not, that would be a ridiculous suggestion.
I would wager that most devices have ano
On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 10:05:51AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 1:46 AM, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
>
> > * splitting non-free in subsets;
> > * adding a non-free-firmware area;
>
> I think we don't want either of these, instead we should *add*
> additional Packages files for
Paul Wise writes:
> Of course not, that would be a ridiculous suggestion.
> I would wager that most devices have another OS installed before
> installing Debian. I propose that the process of installing Debian could
> be made easier if the Debian install process started with an app on that
> OS
On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 11:55:04AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> Some of the ones that can do have free drivers in mesa: Tegra, VC4/5,
> Vivante, Adreno.
>
> Only Mali and PowerVR are missing.
Except that, unlike x86, display and 3D acceleration tend to be separate
chips (or rather, parts of the same
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Boyuan Yang <073p...@gmail.com>
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
pkg-deepin-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org
* Package name: qtdbusextended
Version : 0.0.3
Upstream Author : Nemo Mobile / Jolla Ltd.
* URL : https://github
On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 2:10 PM, Russ Allbery wrote:
> I'm certainly fine to put work into this for those who want to use it, but
> I never boot any existing OS before installing Debian, and I'm sure I'm
> not alone. It's extremely useful to be able to install Debian on bare
> metal (or a newly-re
On Tue, 2017-12-05 at 22:50 -0500, Michael Stone wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 05:08:26PM -0700, Sean Whitton wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 05 2017, Adam Borowski wrote:
> >
> > > Thus: I'd say we should prominently offer two downloads, one with a
> > > paragraph of insults.
> >
> > U
Adam Borowski writes:
> No distruption for existing systems, satisfies those concerned about
> accidentally installing "real" software (as much as the notion of
> executable code running on another processor in your machine, or even
> deeper inside the same processor, being less of software, is r
Paul Wise writes:
> On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 2:10 PM, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> I'm certainly fine to put work into this for those who want to use it,
>> but I never boot any existing OS before installing Debian, and I'm sure
>> I'm not alone. It's extremely useful to be able to install Debian on
>>
On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 2:58 PM, Russ Allbery wrote:
> I think that's probably true, but it also has prerequisites that may not
> be achievable. In other words, it's more user-friendly except when it's
> completely impossible (because the existing system doesn't boot, for
> instance). Other OS in
37 matches
Mail list logo
