I'd like to see this work properly as well.  I can confirm that Chimaera netinstall disks work fine via Ventoy, and Daedalus netinstall disks (or at least the x64 5.0.0 disk) do/does not.  Ventoy provides the user with a partition on the USB drive that can be filled with ISO images, when booted it will present the user with the list of ISOs on the USB drive and allow the user to select which one to boot.  When I select the Daedalus netinstall I get the Devuan installer boot menu, the "Devuan preamble" part, and then:

mount: mounting LABEL=DEVUAN500 on /cdrom failed: No such file or directory
mount: mounting UUID= on /cdrom failed: No such file or directory

Those two lines are repeated five times, followed by:

*** failed to mount the cdrom
*** Starting emergency shell ...

and then I am dropped to a busybox shell. Right after selecting an ISO image the user is presented with a choice of "normal mode", "grub2 mode", "memdisk mode", and file checksum.  None of these options seems to help get the installer to start [for me].  Normal mode gives the above error, grub2 mode just returns to the list of ISO images, memdisk mode says it is copying the ISO to memory and then gives the same error as above.  File checksum mode just gives a submenu allowing the user to generate various checksums on the selected ISO.

Aye, this does seem to be the rub.  It would appear as though the installer [since we are past the Ventoy part at this stage] is trying to mount the parition labeled DEVUAN500 at /cdrom but there *IS NO* partition with that name since it is still just an ISO image.  I personally do not know what is going on behind the scenes in the installer here but that would make sense to me.

If I knew how to perform such a patch I would be happy to try it and report my findings. :-)

I'd also be interested in knowing if anyone has any known-UEFI-only images they can point me to that I can try.  So far Devuan Daedalus is the only image I have tried that has had this problem.

s.

There is no reason you can't continue to use SeaMonkey.  It is actively developed, available for download at seamonkey-project.org, a pretty capable email client, and should work fine on Devuan (as long as you are on an x86 or x64 machine).

PS: I guess to actually answer your question... I use Thunderbird v3.1.20, but that story is much more complicated than just downloading SeaMonkey. :-)

It sounds like you might have a machine with a 64-bit architecture and a 32-bit EFI. :-(  I had one of these machines, and in the end used an image of MacOS El Capitan to get it working again and then gave it away.  If you look up your machine on everymac.com does it show as 64-bit arch with 32-bit EFI?

UA is actually one of the things that annoys me most about Pale Moon.  I can set a single UA that will be used for all sites, or I can set UA on a per domain basis but must use the default UA for any sites I do not specifically set, but having a custom default UA with the ability to set custom UA's on a per domain basis is not an option?  Bah! :-(

Aye, there's the rub!

Just because my friends won't get that joke doesn't mean they won't have to listen to me tell it. :-)

Don't get me wrong, I don't think many people use FTP very often, and the fact that I went looking for some ISO's recently was mostly a coincidence... I just have a hard time buying the idea that FTP is a serious time sink for the Mozilla developers who took the time to implement crap like The Awesome Bar, Pocket, various telemetry garbage, Firefox Maintenance Service, Mr. Robot, forced Cloudflare DNS, and I'm pretty sure they never really deleted all those nude photos of me like they said they did.

Do you mean ws_ftp?  Bah!  I saw your update and clearly I was too slow in my reply. :-)

I figure since ftp hosts files in cleartext it is "spyable" regardless of which client one uses.  Kind of like how Devuan apt uses http by default, and I imagine many people never change it from that default.  I think:

• ftp has its [arguably limited] uses

• some people already use Firefox (perhaps for a digitally long time) to acces ftp services

• removing ftp from Firefox will force those users to obtain a separate application (or alternative to ftp), which could potentially irritate some users enough to go looking for another browser

I'm not a Firefox developer but I still have a hard time believing the impact of ftp on the development process is significant.  At the same time, I also believe if the goal is to reduce bloat within Firefox there are some much bigger fish to fry before ftp.  It is hard for me to see the removal of ftp as a decision intended to serve users rather than to guide digital communications in a direction Mozilla prefers.

It's like they really can't see what's coming.  LAWL!

My 3¢ :-)

One of the answers to this question I have seen a few times is "trust" but I thought that an attempt to describe what that means might help.  People who work on popular software or who manage popular digital services tend to accumulate some defacto power as a result of being part of something that is important to "more than just a few people".  Google has accumulated significant power because a lot of people use their search engine [and apparently some other services].  Facebook has accumulated significant power because they decide what billions of users see every day.  Ubuntu has accumulated significant power because it is [or at least has been] the first place many people turn to when they want to avoid Windows desktop platforms.  As someone who wants to participate in digital communications I want to be able to trust that Google won't use my data and metadata in a way that I don't like, that Facebook won't run experiments to see if they can manipulate public opinion with their news feed, and that Ubuntu won't pump my keystrokes to Amazon.

Debian has accumulated significant power because it is often generally seen as being a stable and dependable distribution with the backing of a long digital history, a lot of experience, and a lot of talent.  I assume this is why many distributions are based on Debian.  I want to be able to trust that Debian will not make decisions that have a negative impact on the stability, security, privacy, and usefulness of my operating system.  I, and I suspect others around here, feel that pushing systemd on users was a mistake... or at the very least that it could have been done more gracefully.  It also should have been obvious to the people making the decision, that the effects would cascade down through many distributions (as well as existing installations) and that Debian's push for systemd could be seen as a sort of "stamp of approval" regarding init systems.  I love to rant about "things that suck" and people frequently will get the impression that I am afraid of change.  I am simply afraid of poorly planned change.  I feel like systemd was poorly planned change.

Having said all that, even if subsequent Debian releases are expected to have a glorious, colourful, and even eccentric list of init systems to choose from, the damage is done.  I'm not going to be quick to shuffle back to Debian because I can't trust that Debian won't create its own Unity-like desktop, or partner up with Amazon to sell me AWS resources, or drop apt in favour of puppy packaging system.  Okay, all of those are pretty unlikely... but the point remains that I have trouble trusting the decision making process that allowed systemd the penetration it enjoys today.

Sweet. :-)

I don't think there was ever a technical reason for me to change from Debian to Devuan... except maybe that it made some of my existing scripts a little happier.  I have said more than once (offline) that I honestly feel like Devuan is perceivably faster than Debian... I'm pretty sure it isn't technically true, but it does feel like it at times.  If it IS in fact faster I'm sure I'll hear about it soon though. :-)

The reason to make the switch [at least for me] is related to the term "free" meaning freedom rather than just a price tag of $0.00.  I believe the Devuan project is more likely to produce decisions that respect my freedom than the Debian project.  In all honesty, the difference may be negligible or may never affect me significantly, but it is like Joel McCrea said in the 1955 movie Wichita: "It's not a question of who's right, it's a question of what's right.".

Definitely!  Like it or not, some people use Windows and I wind up supporting it for some of them.  I tried to keep my father on XP as long as I could, but it was software that pushed his upgrade rather than the terrible security risk the upgrade fanboys were jabbering about.  Eventually his accounting software stopped running on XP and he got his "upgrade".  Similarly, I think that as long as systemd is the default, it will encourage developers to write for it, and maybe write for it exclusively.  If you want to use one of their applications... then you may be forced to use systemd.  I don't think I'd like to be stuck in that situation.

My 3¢.