wow! honestly, some people are really determined to find the security flaws in evvvverything these days. this isnt a value statement, im impressed that cpus and pgp and all our beloved (and relatively secure) tools appear so vulnerable right now.

its all relative and i just had someone give me an amused look because i was talking about rdma/remote rowhammer and they said "cmon, you live in ____ no ones going to rowhammer your router." well no! i didnt think so, but its still good to disable rdma (imo) if you dont need it. i mean its a feature for large data centres, afaik. (my guess is its probably disabled anyway.)

im glad we arent using windows. this latest one is a little close to home, i presume it isnt found in the wild yet? still at the research stage?

thanks for clarifying this katolaz, i did not think it installed non-free anything by default, nor that it included non-free anything in the sources.list, but its nice to have confirmation.

from a technical standpoint im inclined to agree, but the needs of devuan users vary and some of us (using devuan and devuan derivs since march 2015!) have very strict policies about firmware to follow. regardless, there are relatively very few users who are affected at all, i do not expect the default to ever change-- there are other (devuan-related) solutions that should suffice. devuan live may even be one of them.

oops, i missed this before:

sorry, devuan live wont do this out of the box-- but there is a script that will fix this-- do note that i am satisfied with that-- thanks again!

since this is a point about devuan that ive been aware of since 2015, im going to weigh in.

the devuan installer DOES include non-free firmware. if you think im just here to contribute fud, let me continue-- i do not think that devuan INSTALLS any non-free firmware by default.

i can point to where the person in charge of devuans installer comes right out and says that he will consider abandoning his devuan work if this is not allowed.

and while i dont agree with that decision, i can certainly understand the reason hes insisting.

in debian this policy is stricter and this all predates systemd inclusion, its nothing to do with systemd at all.

if you have debian on a server for example, the network hardware is not always supported with free firmware. so the installer includes non-free firmware for the purpose of making the network available. for some users, who have very strict policies about non-free binaries, this is an issue. its rare that someone will have a problem with this.

the kernel that comes with devuan (last i checked) is the same strict-policy kernel that debian uses-- refracta uses it, and i use it. so if you are satisfied with the policy of the debian kernel, then you should be alright with devuan too.

but if you are concerned about the non-free firmware in the installer, it is possible (to the best of my knowledge) to use refracta which uses a different installer. and it places the non-free firmware in a folder on the desktop, which you can delete and i dont believe it is automatically loaded! if you wish to remove it from the iso as well, im happy to help with that.

as the lead refracta developer is also in charge of devuan live, using devuan live as your "installer" may also help here-- id have to ask fsr about this.

as to whether im making this up (or out of date) i suspect that if i comb through the sources of the installer (id need to be pointed to where they are) i could find where the non-free firmware is included, but im no expert there.

as to where the devuan installer developer makes this claim in 2015, i believe i can find it either in irc (yes, search is broken but its being worked on?) or the mailing lists.

but really, fernando wasnt spreading fud at all. there have to be other people here that were already aware of this official devuan decision, and i am one of them.

note that proving it with the source almost certainly isnt necessary, it should be possible to confirm this just by asking actual devuan developers. if the policy is (and its very likely) still to include the network firmware, theyll say so-- its not like theyre not hiding it or this was a big secret, its just not often mentioned.

all yad needs now is a file dialog, and it can replace most gui software.

...and a fork based on qt instead of gtk, though i like it regardless.

with whom should i address false accusations on the forum? i am most certainly not lying.

i note that ive been accused of misinformation, aggression and now outright lying. the problem is that there is no way to address this-- i can tell you im not lying, you dont care, youll just accuse me further. there is no process for resolving this. the "facts" are self-referential, evidence does not count.

you realise i have no real options here, just take whatever you say or leave it-- even if its about me?

how does one go about proving their "alternate facts" are not lies here? is such a thing possible? i would like to clear my name.

its very early for hobsons choice. i ask a question, i get accused of ill intent, i point this out, i get called a liar.

but im free to go? before i leave defeated, can i ask how you know that im lying?

romanian accents/words are lovely. it sounds like the best parts of french and italian put together (harder than french, softer than italian.)

ive been using devuan and derivatives (almost exclusively, including jaromils valentine iso) since march 2015. though mostly ive used the efforts of the devuan-live maintainer, and before that i had very positive experiences with gnuinos.

i have no problem with the almost no code of conduct itself, though in practice it does seem like getting banned here happens pretty often and in practice is more like joining irc than a forum.

i dont have a goal here to get banned specifically, though if i had a goal to avoid it im not sure how much guesswork would be involved. unfair bans discourage legitimate participation, i dont think anybody disputes that fact?

it seems like if one conducts themselves here with similar expectations as one might bring to the dng list or the irc channel, its easy to trip a ban here. so a well-intended person might come with the wrong expectations based on their understanding of the broader devuan community.

"why are you even here" seems to be an increasingly common question on this forum, posed indirectly to users without coming out and asking them. so i will say that im here to ask a number of questions about devuan (the distro) and at least one or two about its official forum.

we are a rainbow of users after all, but some posts towards banned users make me wonder if we are required to be sunshiny. if the official devuan forum is the sunshiny devuan forum, well-- thats shiny! but maybe its more fair to have a warning to that effect, in addition to the ncoc. or maybe this thread is the warning?