Check the bug reports:

https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgrepo … t=unstable

Maybe a relevant one among that bugfest: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugrepo … bug=682369

Still seems open and unfixed...

I remember all that, at the time.  The plan was always to coerce and force systemd adoption.  Many of us argued about this at the time, but were shouted down and categorised as "tin foil hat" wearers, by the noisy parrots who drank the Red Hat kewl aid..

If something is well designed and works well, there's no need to coerce or force, or weave it in as a dependency.

If something is badly designed, but they want to establish it as the de facto standard, then that's where you find the coercion and weaving in and forced dependencies.  It's a corporate tactic - it's why many "need" MS Windows, or an MS account or a google account or social networking membership, etc.  The bad, profit driven, things are always loaded with coercion, security theatre, scare mongering, marketing, etc - and sadly they fall for it over and over again.

UEFI is bad - you got it, because a consortium of US based Big Tech corporations made sure you got it, because it's in their interests (especially Microsoft's), not yours, theirs.

"Microsoft loves Linux" is akin to:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/To_Serve_ … ight_Zone)

And now the chief architect of systemd works for that number one enemy of FOSS and Linux.

Eventually Devuan will need a new base.  I would guess that it will need a new base Linux distribution much sooner than it will need a new kernel.  Debian project is toxic, it takes Microsoft money and cannot be trusted as a base, or for anything else for that matter.  It will serve it's own interests and corporate interests, such as those of Canonical or Microsoft for example.

https://techrights.org/n/2024/06/11/Deb … hat_.shtml

This "rot" goes right through to the Linux kernel itself: https://techrights.org/o/2023/06/20/mic … oundation/

I posted about firmware more than a few times and of the blobs misnomer and fallacious argument, at this site and elsewhere:

https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=30672#p30672

The bottom line is that loadable device firmware is a problem created by the hardware vendor - and the root of the problem is there and not in any Linux distribution or BSD OS' decision whether or not to include them / means of distributing them.

In simple terms there is firmware which is loaded on a device, flashed to it's EEPROM and there are those devices which don't have an EEPROM to start with, where the firmware is loaded onto the device (usually via some functionality of the Windows driver).

For the device to be usable under Linux or e.g. OpenBSD, a similar mechanism is needed (a "firmware loader") to load the firmware onto the device, in order to start the device and use it.

So the choice is not a choice of "blobs or no blobs", it boils down to a choice of hardware.  i.e. don't buy it if you're that concerned.

If you already own the hardware which requires the loadable firmware...  and want to use the device (rather than dispose of it), then you will have to install and load the firmware.

Many of your other devices, such as hard disk controllers, CPU, ethernet controllers, already have this proprietary firmware running regardless - as it's already flashed onto the device.  So to be "blob free", you would have to remove this, assuming that were even possible in every case, as well and end up with bricked and useless hardware (but blob free at least).  This is why, in my view, the "blobs" argument is a fallacious one, which addresses the wrong issue.  The real issue is one of "open hardware".  Yes you have a variety of FOSS operating system choices, but the primary target platform is one dominated and controlled by Microsoft and OEMs who are in a secret deal with them.  The platform contains what I regards as malicious surveillance oriented firmware, such as the Intel Management Engine - an autonomous subsystem with out of band network access, which is always running even if the system is powered down, but still connected.  This "blob" is the elephant in the living room - loadable device firmware is just a pointless distraction, or virtue signalling for those obsessed with Stallmanist compliance.

It's worth noting that the firmware image, is not a Linux or even a Windows binary - it's binary code designed to run on the device itself.  Hence you can't execute these firmware images and if you had several hundred of them in /lib/firmware but own none of the relevant hardware - those files will sit there just taking up space and will never be executed.

Oh so superior. Have you ever heard of "the mote and the beam?". Your arrogance prevents you from understanding my "thinking or motivations".

That's it. I will not argue further with a fanatic. Have fun in your little dictatorship, nurturing your sycophants... This is your life after all.

Great that you made this thread!

And you can, as apparently you have a special licence for this, as proclaimed by the admins here...  and this is now even more apparent to the observer. You're more than just a twat, you're one of the numerous minor embarasssments to this project - thought rest assured your free reign will continue.

Anyone else posting such quality of content would have been quickly censured, but by golinux' own admission you may freely troll this site, due to the significance of your contributions to whatever it is you contribute to... so go ahead my man, knock yourself out.  Let's see what you're all about...

Thank you for so clearly revealing the bias for all to see.

Ralph yes I'll strive for the three Ps, while your lunatic fringe, right wing crony gets free reign ...

And all of that effort is focused on their own business agenda.  Which may or may not be in line with a users best interests...  usually it isn't.

Their motives certainly aren't altruistic.

I read the link and came to the same conclusions as steve_v.  It's a "damage control" piece from a typical mouth piece of the Red Hat/freedesktop.org/gnome project, etc camp.  systemd project is well noted for producing such pieces of work over the years - blame shifting, offsetting, setting up strawman attackers of systemd and then going to great lengths to denounce them.  Whether it's systemd's fault or not, it's typical systemd strategy.  But you should consider why systemd project always feel the need to write these patronising "it's not our fault" pieces.

I would guess that nobody knows/cares.

You won't get that version to run with a 5.5 or newer kernel without a kernel patch and recompile of the kernel.  I believe the release you are running is based on the 5.10 kernel.

Try searching the web for "Linux  5.10 nvidia 340.108"

I'm not sure it works quite like that, though this add on is new to me and I find myself rather skeptical ...

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefox/addon/adnauseam/

By blocking the ads in the first place, it conserves a lot of CPU and thus power.  Then sending back the response to the host is only a tiny bit of data.  However, I do question it's worth.  Blocking ads is part of the battle, preventing fingerprinting and blocking trackers is another part.  Not sure where this fits in.

I'm not sure there's any sense discussing licensing.  I'm also not going to discuss OpenBSD much, let alone defend it.  Kelsoo quotes gnu.org and has clearly made up his mind already.

When it comes to funding - it's clear that Linux has been a massive commercial effort, developed and funded by a consortium of "Big Tech", including Microsoft, IBM, Red Hat and google, to name just a few, for many years now.  That's an indisputable fact.  I actually don't think that makes the Linux kernel any "worse" in terms of functionality however (we are all hypocrites, all reaping the rewards and it runs on the hardware we want it to run on).  Corporate influence, funding and developers on the corporate payroll is now intrinsically woven into Linux eco system.

Most of OpenBSD's funding however comes from it's development of OpenSSH, rather than the OS itself - though it could be argued that OpenSSH is permissive licensed for the very reasons you've stated above.  I vaguely recall a quote from Theo de Raadt actually criticizing the corporations using OpenSSH for their own profit and contributing nothing back.  You could quite rightfully say "well, duh...".  I think corporations taking permissive licensed code for profit and contributing nothing back is a very valid concern - I also think corporations buying off and hijacking GPL licenced projects to the extent that they effectively run the show and then steer development to suit their commercial interests is equally valid.

systemd exists to suit commercial interests for example...  Linux distributions and other projects were steered towards and then railroaded into systemd, due to the sheer inertia of corporate reps within multiple free software projects.  Without corporate control, something like systemd would never have happened.

I actually believe that de Raadt truly subscribes to the permissive licensing philosophy (rather than being some corporate stooge/sell out as you seem to suggest) in the same way that someone like Stallman believes in the copyleft licenses.  In my opinion neither camp are ready to accept that with enough money and power and buying off the right people - both licenses become almost irrelevant.  The "freeness" of a project, really depends on the project leaders and developers working on it.  If they can resist the "man from Microsoft/google" and his big bag of money, the project remains "free", if they can't, then you have yet another "open source" project.

Around 85% of code contributions to the Linux kernel come from those in the corporate employ.  For example, you have working video hardware nowadays, due to AMD and Intel engineers who are paid to develop Linux drivers for their hardware (the 'BSDs also port this code, but it's primarily developed for Linux).  With a project like OpenBSD, the overwhelming majority of the contributions to it's kernel would come from volunteers - and it's a tiny project by comparison.

The kernel code contributed by AMD and Intel to the Linux kernel is not GPL'd, but released under a permissive license similar to the MIT license.  But a big part of that effort comes in the form of proprietary, but redistributable, binary only firmware, which is loaded onto and runs on the device itself (as headstick has already explained).  The driver is free - the firmware needed for the driver and hardware is not - thus it's not actually "free" at all - it's all about manipulation and careful selection of "free" licences to meet a commercial end.

x86, also the main focus of Red Hat, SUSE and Canonical, is strongly tied to Microsoft - who have long standing secret deals with the hardware manufacturers (OEMs) to ensure Microsoft Windows exclusivity on consumer PCs.  Red Hat, SUSE and Canonical are all "Microsoft partners" - who work in a "cartel" with Microsoft and ensure that Microsoft's ownership and total control of the consumer PC market is never challenged.

I had something similar a few days ago, I had assumed it was a plasma issue at first, (I use plasma at work only - in fact I only use Linux at work) and after deleting the mess of configs, ~/.cache , ~/.kde5 - and then when that didn't work, doing it all again and then rebooting eventually "solved" it.

Not the first time I've had such issues.  Plasma 5 just seems overly complex and unwieldy.

Fleeing tyranny as well eh?  Wait until your account over there gets sadistically deleted by the resident tyrant.  He likes to utilise his shiny new plaything to the full...