Lenny is the codename for the next release of debian, which will be debian 5.0 formally. For the first time that I can remember, debian will fit on one disk. OK, so it’s a blu-ray disk (BD), but I’m sure it will be a selling point to some people. The announcement goes into some more detail about the implications for data transfer and mirror sizes, as well as noting that it stresses genisoimage beyond breaking point.
Before the release, there’s the small matter of about 200 bugs which we need to fix. If you can help, please do.
One prickly problem in some of the bugs is that a second debian release in a row is looking like it will allow violations of the Debian Free Software Guidelines into the release. (I don’t think all of the listed example bugs are violations, but some are). My main question about the firmware ones remains the same as two years ago:-
“I think the idea that refusing to ship non-free firmware in main will strengthen demand for free firmware is worthy of consideration. Debian helps users to take control of their operating system. Increasing the demand for free firmware might also help users to take control of their hardware, or at least highlight that there’s this crap which their operating system uses to support their hardware but doesn’t have its normal freedoms.”
“However, I’m undecided whether it’s a good idea to exclude them from the distribution CDs and so on. How big is the problem of vital hardware which won’t work without firmware being copied to it? Should we split non-free into non-free-hardware and non-free, allowing non-free-hardware packages onto the CDs?”
Ben’s technical blog: For those who care about firmware is tracking some of the hardware, but I don’t own any of the untested ones. That’s not surprising: I’ve been trying to avoid closed firmware for a few years now.
Debian bug #502959 discusses how one of the key debian project machines is affected. There’s a nice suggestion of using some of the project’s $64,000 to buy some hardware that’s fully supported by free software, but the bug has been closed by Peter Palfrader with the message “go screw yourselves and do something useful, like find a bridge”. Yikes.
Is there less vital hardware now than two years ago? Can the patches provided really not be included?
This whole firmware discussion is becoming (partly) ridiculous. As pointed out by the Intel guy mostly responsible for their OSS efforts, there are parts implemented in firmware that a company is never going to release for one reason or the other. Mostly because of legal reasons like who is liable when a customer uses his WLAN hardware outside the allowed limits in $COUNTRY? Or we use technology from company X and don’t have their ok for releasing that stuff to the public.
And then there are the things that are a company’s unique features. Most products in the IT are very similar to each other and differences are often just different firmwares.
Don’t get me wrong, I would very much like to have a complete free and open device for every aspect of my digital life. But I don’t see that happen in the near future. Projects like OpenMoko or other open hardware projects are the way I’d like to go.
But then, we have most probably to deal with the problem, that there is only one vendor per product left, as there are no differences, which are easily copyable. It doesn’t mean, that there are not a few producers, but just one developing company/community (at least if this idea really takes off).
Then another point is, that quite a few people aren’t using stock-kernels from Debian but compile their own, which means they have the non-free stuff anyway (or don’t need it anymore, as newer kernel versions often reduce the amount of required blobs.
In the hope, that we reach a as-perfect-as-possible, privacy-respecting, free world/society,
Drizzt
“Lenny is the codename for the next release of debian, which I guess will be debian 4.1 formally.”
No, Lenny will be Debian 5.0
miksuh, Thanks. I’ve corrected the post. I did see it in http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2008/03/msg00001.html at the time, but didn’t find it while writing the above and thought debian wouldn’t be so version-inflating to go straight from 4.0 to 5.0… but I was wrong. Anyone find a link to why it’s 5.0? It’s not in that announcement.
Drizzt, if the user does something illegal with some hardware, the user is liable, else there’s a bug in $COUNTRY’s laws. Also, if a manufacturer shortcutted and used company X’s firmware without enough permission to release it as free software, that’s a bug in the manufacturer. There doesn’t seem much reason to make them bugs in debian instead.
Remember that I support something like non-free-firmware as a transitional aid, so I don’t think those bugs should stop debian releasing.
The thing with these laws governing frequencies is very tricky. Because normally no legislative expects the people of a country to know exactly which frequencies are ok to use at what strength, there are unified tests a manufacturer has to pass, then gets some sort of label he is required to notice in the manual and everybody is happy. The problem is: the hardware is the same in every country (as it would be too expensive to make one for each) but directed by the firmware the hardware operates within certain boundaries. So while maybe you and maybe I would be able to check, whether the hardware is doing what is allowed a lot of people won’t be able (nor would they have the equipment to check).
The problem with upstream-parts of firmware comes from the idea of Intellectual Property (yes I hate it too, but that won’t get us rid of this nonsense). Which means, if you buy some piece of hardware, its chips are assembled of several parts/»technologies«, which some company has integrated into one. Therefore they buy licenses which allow them to sell an »unaltered copy« of said »technology« or »IP core«.
Whether that should be a bug inside Debian or not is a completely different topic. And I wasn’t speaking about how Debian should deal with it. While my preferred way would be something like: Encourage users to watch, what they are buying (maybe provide an list of chips/hardware which run completely on free software (driver and firmware)), then move the non-free stuff to non-free and actually notify the user about it.(so he notices where his/her quest for freedom is broken) and then have a totally free »main« distribution.
Last but not least: my post wasn’t about delaying the release or not. I just wanted to point out why we will have to deal with closed-source firmware for a long time (IMO).
Greetings,
Drizzt