And yes, I was aware that I was also repeating some arguments already presented in this thread. But, this time, it was to present them as justification for a new aspect (education) that I hadn't mentioned before.

(I've seen it myself, with the Debian installer asking if one wants to add proprietary firmware, and then telling the user to then use an external medium to provide such firmware.)

The "downside" of Debian's approach is that, it doesn't allow for a person/novice to just install the OS without caring about such "free vs proprietary" issues. But, (ethical issues aside) for the reasons I stated, this is something that is not only not desirable, but also potentially dangerous - and, also something that (I think) the user should definitely be educated about (which is what I believe that Debian does, by not facilitating such procedure).

I believe in choice. I also believe pressing the wrong key would be operator error.

Yes to both of these statements.  Forcing non-free is as offensive as limiting its availability.  Crusaders are entitled to their opinion but  it is just that.  The choice to use or not use non-free is the USER's.  ATM, that part of the installer is being carefully scrutinized, tested and updated to ensure consistency.  As to pressing the wrong key . . . who of us hasn't done that a time or two.  You take your lumps and move on.  But it's PEBKAC, not the installer's fault.

We already have all sorts of distros that install proprietary firmware/software without even asking the user. And, the reason why I really like Debian, is because it doesn't do anything of this sort.

(If "user-friendliness" and nonconcern for the inclusion of proprietary firmware or software are the guiding lines, then people can fork Ubuntu, for example, instead.)

Debian clearly differentiates itself from other distros for only including, in its installer - and also using, under normal conditions - Free Software. And, if the user really wants to and knows what s/he's doing, s/he can nevertheless install proprietary software her/himself.

The use of anything proprietary should always be avoided and discouraged. Since that, proprietary software is, by its own nature, always potentially dangerous (ex: https://linux.slashdot.org/story/07/08/ … ox-profile).

Whenever possible, the best solution is to always substitute your components by ones for which there are free drivers and firmware (https://h-node.org/). And, when talking about laptops and other equipments that are more difficult to modify the components of, everyone can avoid all of these problems by informing her/himself first about the equipments they want before buying them.

Install and Graphical Install (beta netinstall iso and dvd):

  installer does not ask about non-free packages.
  selecting eth0 results in no non-free firmware installed
  selecting wlan0 installs non-free wireless firmware

Expert Install and Expert Graphical Install (only tested dvd):

  If you select a mirror, you get asked about non-free packages.
  Without a mirror, you do not get asked about non-free.

***  Without a mirror, non-free firmware gets installed regardless of
whether eth0 or wlan0 was configured.

*** With a mirror, wlan0 configured, answer "NO" to the non-free question,
and non-free firmware gets installed anyway.

Note: the sources.list issue seems to be fixed in yesterday's mini.iso.

I used the 32 bit netinstall .isos of both Jessie and Ascii. I again used the Expert Graphical Install. During both installations, I chose NOT to include non-free and contrib.

After both installations of the base system, I checked the sources.list with nano. Both installations resulted in...the first line only had main. The lines for security, updates, and backports all had main and non-free. Contrib wasn't included in any lines.

Miyo, have you seen the question about non-free in the ascii installer isos? If so, which iso did you use? Thanks.

No sir; I'm not familiar with the question. Here's all that I know...

1. In BOTH the Jessie and Ascii installers, all that I've ever used is the netinstall to install the base system and build from there...
2. In BOTH the Jessie and Ascii installers, I'm given the choice to include non-free during the installation while using the "Expert Graphical Install" option. I always choose to include non-free, so I can't answer as to whether not choosing that option works as far as not including it in the sources.list.
3. In BOTH the Jessie and Ascii netinstallers, I DO KNOW that including "backports" works as does the option to NOT include "deb-src" in the sources.list.

If I have time tomorrow, I will try a basic installation with both Jessie and Ascii...using the "Expert Graphical Installation" to see if choosing NOT to include non-free works.

Sorry that I couldn't be more help now.

The problem I have with non-free software (firmware included) is that, I see all of it as potentially dangerous (ex: https://linux.slashdot.org/story/07/08/ … ox-profile). And, for that reason, I want to either (1) not install it, or (if I really need to) (2) to install it only when I really want and decide to.

And, I can give you an example.

The motherboard I'm using needs a proprietary firmware to reach higher speeds on its Ethernet port. And, because I see such components in my computer that connect to the Internet (Ethernet port, Wi-Fi card) as particularly sensitive components, in terms of security, I don't want to (ever) use any proprietary software (or even just firmware) on those.

So, when Debian asks me, in an installation, if I want to add any proprietary firmware to run on my Ethernet card, I simply choose "No".

But, with Devuan's installer having proprietary firmware in its installation media, I fear that it might add such proprietary firmware (to my Ethernet driver, for example) and not even tell me anything about it.

(Something that, with Debian wouldn't even be possible - because Debian's installer doesn't have any kind of non-free software in it. And, I would have to be the one to - very knowingly and conscientiously - add it myself.)