Le 09/12/2016 à 00:46, Mark Fletcher a écrit :
that: 1) some drivers, for esoteric reasons, don't work as modules and
have to be compiled into the kernel image,
AFAIK, none of built-in drivers need any out-of-kernel firmware. How
could such firmware be loaded before a root filesystem is mounte
On Fri, 09 Dec 2016, Mark Fletcher wrote:
> So, if your computer is generally working it's possible that the device
> driver that is complaining about missing firmware is actually a driver
> you don't need... and if that turns out to be the case, you have the
Not in this case, the BCM43xx netwo
On Thu, Dec 08, 2016 at 08:34:49PM +0100, Yvan Masson wrote:
> So, from the result of:
> # dmesg | grep firmware
> -> you know that kernel module "b43" is missing some firmware
> (ucode15.fw)
>
> After enabling contrib and non-free repository, you can search for
> related packages:
> $ apt sea
So, from the result of:
# dmesg | grep firmware
-> you know that kernel module "b43" is missing some firmware
(ucode15.fw)
After enabling contrib and non-free repository, you can search for
related packages:
$ apt search b43
This lists interesting packages: "firmware-b43-installer" and
"firmwa
Thanks for your help. Responses to your suggestions are given below.
Ben Finney: Detect network hardware.
Some of your hardware needs non-free firmware files to operate. The
firmware can be loaded from removable media, such as a USB stick or floppy.
The missing firmware files are: b43/ucode15.fw b
On Wed, 07 Dec 2016, Steve Greig wrote:
> When I installed debian I got a message saying my computer (emachines
> laptop AMD Athlon X2 64bit) needed some non-free software. The names of the
The output of "lspci" and cat "/proc/cpuinfo" would tell us a lot more.
I don't recall the name of the hard
Hi,
> I would appreciate any advice on this. Is it possible to run a test
> to see what that software was and install it now. Although I would
> prefer not have any non-free software I would have it if it was
> something quite important such as controlling the fan.
As said Santiago Vila, it is pr
On Wed, Dec 07, 2016 at 11:11:29AM +, Steve Greig wrote:
> When I installed debian I got a message saying my computer (emachines
> laptop AMD Athlon X2 64bit) needed some non-free software. The names of the
> software were given although I did not record the names. I decided to go
> ahead witho
Steve Greig writes:
> When I installed debian I got a message saying my computer (emachines
> laptop AMD Athlon X2 64bit) needed some non-free software. The names of the
> software were given although I did not record the names.
That's important information. Could you try running the installer a
On Tue, 13 Mar 2007 17:17:34 +0100
Michelle Konzack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Am 2007-03-09 17:46:54, schrieb Trosinenko Anatoly:
> > There is a driver MTD -> NFTL in the kernel-source-2.6.8
> > (2.6.8-16sarge1).
> > Is it free software??? (See description in "make menuconfig".) There is
On (13/03/07 17:17), Michelle Konzack wrote:
> Who use 2.6.8 today? --
> It is outdate since years and nobody care realy about it.
Well it's still the standard kernel in sarge.. and my servers are
running it.
Regards
Clive
--
www.clivemenzies.co.uk ...
...strategies for business
--
To UNS
Am 2007-03-09 17:46:54, schrieb Trosinenko Anatoly:
> There is a driver MTD -> NFTL in the kernel-source-2.6.8
> (2.6.8-16sarge1).
> Is it free software??? (See description in "make menuconfig".) There is also
> the module "nftl" in the kernel-image-2.6.8-2-686 (2.6.8-16sarge1).
Who use 2.
Richard E. Hawkins Esq. wrote:
> manoj wrote,
>
> >I certainly would prefer the Debian project itself not pass
> > these judgements on non-free packages unless we had legal advice.
>
> speaking hypothetically, as my law licenses are inactive to avoid the $800 a
> year in fees while i spend time as
manoj wrote,
>I certainly would prefer the Debian project itself not pass
> these judgements on non-free packages unless we had legal advice.
speaking hypothetically, as my law licenses are inactive to avoid the $800 a
year in fees while i spend time as a graduate student, and am probably n
I am more than just a little amazed at parts of this thread...
The 'Official Debian' position is not only clear it is also the ONLY
rational possition given the terms of Debian's own license.
Encouraging CD producers to review the licenses in non-free and make
their own decisions is sane.
As far
Hi,
>>"Peter" == Peter Prohaska <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Peter> The idea of keeping up a list of files from non-free which can
Peter> be burnt on CD without hesitating would be a very good
Peter> thing. It might be just a directory with symlinks to packages
Peter> in non-free. So there would no
Hi there,
I usually stay away from these types of discusion but I thought I had
better step in on this one and provide some possible solutions.
Most people seem to want to be able to get hold of the the non-free
software however not everyone has access to a connection which is fast
or reliable. L
On Tue, Mar 31, 1998 at 03:43:42PM -0700, Bob Nielsen wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Mar 1998, King Lee wrote:
>
> > I want Linux to become a viable alternative to Microsoft, not
> > because I hate Microsoft, but because Linux is better in many
> > circumstances. I would like corporate information technology
Bob Hilliard wrote (really):
>
> You ("E.L. Meijer \(Eric\)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>" wrote:
> > On Mon, 30 Mar 1998, Bob Hilliard wrote:
>
> Although my response to King Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> started this thread, the quotation you attribute to me was not written
> by me. I believe, bu
On Tue, Mar 31, 1998 at 04:04:15PM -0500, Stephen Carpenter wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 31 Mar 1998, Stephen Carpenter wrote:
>
> > : I would like to see non-free debian packages on CDs...
> > : it would make my life and the lives of many people easier...
> > Of course it w
On Tue, 31 Mar 1998, King Lee wrote:
> I want Linux to become a viable alternative to Microsoft, not
> because I hate Microsoft, but because Linux is better in many
> circumstances. I would like corporate information technology
> managers to use Linux for mail servers, print servers, and
> whateve
On Tue, 31 Mar 1998 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Mar 1998, Stephen Carpenter wrote:
>
> [snip ... and btw, your lines are exceptionally long. ]
>
> : I would like to see non-free debian packages on CDs...
> : it would make my life and the lives of many people easier...
>
> Of course
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Mar 1998, Stephen Carpenter wrote:
>
> [snip ... and btw, your lines are exceptionally long. ]
sorry...here at work im stuck in win95...netscape doesn't have much for
helping you keep lines under 80 chars
(but I try)
> : I would like to see non-free debian
On Tue, 31 Mar 1998, Stephen Carpenter wrote:
[snip ... and btw, your lines are exceptionally long. ]
: I would like to see non-free debian packages on CDs...
: it would make my life and the lives of many people easier...
Of course it would.
: and I would like to see some effort to make it easi
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I am curious as to what the problem is with the current system of distribution
> whereby Debian is distributed 'pure' on CD. And those users who have no
> problem
> with non-free liscences are free to download non-free debian packages from the
> Debian FTP site and mi
You ("E.L. Meijer \(Eric\)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>" wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Mar 1998, Bob Hilliard wrote:
Although my response to King Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
started this thread, the quotation you attribute to me was not written
by me. I believe, but am not sure, that it was written by Mr. Le
I hope you like it . I haven't used it too much. It comes with
alot of things including a command line conversion filter that handles a
large number of formats. I found it easier to do many conversions with
imagemagick than with netpbm
On Mon, 30 Mar 1998, King Lee wrote:
>
> Thanks for
>
>
>
> On Mon, 30 Mar 1998, Bob Hilliard wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> OOPS - I did not mean to start a flame war. May I give
> a little more context to my original post?
>
> I will use the Debian packages when I can. If xv doesn't
> come with Debian, maybe I will use a substitue if it is
> as fu
On 30 Mar 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Hi,
> >>"King" == King Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> King> I hope you continue to support packages like xv and netpbm. I
> King> think there are too many good packages out there for the
> King> freeware community to ignore. If you support them pl
Hi,
>>"King" == King Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
King> I hope you continue to support packages like xv and netpbm. I
King> think there are too many good packages out there for the
King> freeware community to ignore. If you support them please make
King> them as easily accessible as possible.
Thanks for the tip. I will probably replace xv with imagemagik.
Netpbm contains a number of programs that can be called from
a script. If imagemagik is an X11 program, I may not be able
to pipe images.
King Lee
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 30 Mar 1998, G John Lapeyre wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 30 M
Hi,
>>"Bob" == Bob Hilliard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Bob> Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: The "Official CD"
>> I think we should not try to change this trend at all
Bob> It is bad because it is contrary to section 5. of the Social
Bob> Contract "We encourage CD manufacturers to re
Hi,
>>"Alex" == <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Alex> I was always amaised how all revolutionaries are alike...
You seem to mean this in a pejorative manner (if I am wrong, I
apologize). However, if it is pejorative, I am glad -- for that
means, deep down, you realize the utter fallacy of
Hi,
Debian is not ognoring non-free software. We maintain it, we
support it, it even is available from our ftp site. We do draw the
line at promoting it on our official CD, though. Anyone interested
can derive a distribution off the Debian distribution, and fill it as
chock full of non
Hi,
>>"King" == King Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
King> Some of stuff in non-free is, in my opinion, rather basic and
King> cdrom vendors should be encouraged to include it. Especially
King> since other vendors include it with their distribution.
Are you volunteering to take personal l
On Mon, 30 Mar 1998, King Lee wrote:
>
> I will use the Debian packages when I can. If xv doesn't
> come with Debian, maybe I will use a substitue if it is
imagemagik
> as functional, or close. However there are packages
> like netpbm which, to my knowledge cannot be replaced.
Hello,
This is a problem of practicality, but I think it
can be solved. Everything starts in non-free_2,
and for people read the licenses of the important
packages. If they meet some criteria, it is moved to
non-free_1. A package is important if several users
read the read the licenses and vou
On Mon, 30 Mar 1998, Bob Hilliard wrote:
Hello,
OOPS - I did not mean to start a flame war. May I give
a little more context to my original post?
I will use the Debian packages when I can. If xv doesn't
come with Debian, maybe I will use a substitue if it is
as functional, or close. Howeve
On Mon, 30 Mar 1998, King Lee wrote:
> May I suggest that you might make a non-free_1 and
> non-free_2 directory. The non-free_1 directory would
> contain software for which there is no possible legal
> liability for the cdrom vendor and cdrom vendors would
> be encouraged to include. The dire
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi,
> >>"Bob" == Bob Hilliard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Bob> I would like to see someone come up with a way to persuade
> Bob> vendors to include as much of non-free as possible, while still
> Bob> issuing the "Official CD".
>
> I object
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bob> The "Official CD" is a Good Thing (TM), but this side effect is a
> Bob> Bad Thing (TM).
>
> What do you mean, bad thing? Are we not trying to promote free
> software?Why is it a bad thing that more and more CD vendors are
> restricting
> Bob> Prior to the "Official CD", some vendors, such as CheapBytes,
> Bob> included substantial parts of non-free on their CDs while others,
> Bob> including Infomagic, ignored non-free. Since we made the
> Bob> "Official CD" available with the bo release, all CD vendors seem
> Bob> to have taken
Hello
Thanks for the prompt reply!
May I suggest that you might make a non-free_1 and
non-free_2 directory. The non-free_1 directory would
contain software for which there is no possible legal
liability for the cdrom vendor and cdrom vendors would
be encouraged to include. The directory non-
I hate "Me too"'s but Mnoj you are 100% right. ebian is meant as a
champion of free-software. By leaving non-free off of the CD's, we are
saying that we oppose restricted software. The user can still get it if
they want it but the extra effort helps drive the point home. I
personally package a
Hi,
>>"Bob" == Bob Hilliard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Bob> I would like to see someone come up with a way to persuade
Bob> vendors to include as much of non-free as possible, while still
Bob> issuing the "Official CD".
I object quite strongly. This seems to go against the spirit
of the
Hi,
>>"Bob" == Bob Hilliard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Bob> Prior to the "Official CD", some vendors, such as CheapBytes,
Bob> included substantial parts of non-free on their CDs while others,
Bob> including Infomagic, ignored non-free. Since we made the
Bob> "Official CD" available with the bo
King Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have just installed debian from cdrom (infomagic),
> and some of my favorite packages, available
> on Red Hat, are missing from the Debian
> distribution. These packages (netpbm , xv) are in the non-free
> subdirectory of packages in www.debian.org, but i
> I have just installed debian from cdrom (infomagic),
> and some of my favorite packages, available
> on Red Hat, are missing from the Debian
> distribution. These packages (netpbm , xv) are in the non-free
> subdirectory of packages in www.debian.org, but in the distributions
> available on cd
48 matches
Mail list logo
