Freedombox is on the list of banned packages, what to do?

MrReplikant · 2023-03-14 13:43:13

Title says it all, Freedombox is a banned package since one of it's components has a deeply entrenched dependency on systemd. So I'm just asking for ideas from everyone on what we could potentially do for Devuan, considering Freedombox is one of Debian's major (And among some groups, one of the most coveted) blends, that we are now unable to run. I have tried to patch cockpit-ws, to no avail. It's deeply intertwined with systemd services and systemd pam bits. So if anyone has suggestions as to what alternatives or solutions we can explore, please by all means talk about them here.

boughtonp · 2023-03-14 15:33:04

It took me a few reads of your message to see that you mentioned cockpit-ws - the part of FreedomBox which is the problem. That information should be more obvious, along with some relevant links for those unfamiliar.

FreedomBox (a home server kit from Eben Moglen that packages a bunch of web-focused software running on Debian), uses the Cockpit server administration tool, which heavily uses systemd - not surprising given it is sponsored by RedHat.

Given that, fixing Cockpit not to use systemd is unlikely to be a viable path - which means providing an alternative.

Does FreedomBox entirely rely on Cockpit? i.e. if one satisfies dependencies with a dummy cockpit package does it fail, or does FreedomBox still install and run, merely without the HTTP based login part?

If the latter, it shouldn't be too difficult to build an alternative login option - the hard part may be convincing the freedombox package maintainers to accept the alternative dependency.

However, if FreedomBox is too tightly coupled to Cockpit, then it probably involves a fair bit more time and effort...

Last edited by boughtonp (2023-03-14 15:34:37)

MrReplikant · 2023-03-15 13:15:50

boughtonp wrote:

It took me a few reads of your message to see that you mentioned cockpit-ws - the part of FreedomBox which is the problem. That information should be more obvious, along with some relevant links for those unfamiliar.
FreedomBox (a home server kit from Eben Moglen that packages a bunch of web-focused software running on Debian), uses the Cockpit server administration tool, which heavily uses systemd - not surprising given it is sponsored by RedHat.
Given that, fixing Cockpit not to use systemd is unlikely to be a viable path - which means providing an alternative.
Does FreedomBox entirely rely on Cockpit? i.e. if one satisfies dependencies with a dummy cockpit package does it fail, or does FreedomBox still install and run, merely without the HTTP based login part?
If the latter, it shouldn't be too difficult to build an alternative login option - the hard part may be convincing the freedombox package maintainers to accept the alternative dependency.
However, if FreedomBox is too tightly coupled to Cockpit, then it probably involves a fair bit more time and effort...

Dummy packages will get it to install, but without systemd to start the web services freedombox will not even start. Sooo....yeah, I'd say it's pretty tightly coupled with Cockpit

golinux · 2023-03-15 15:03:04

@MrReplikant . . . FYI . . .

ralph.ronnquist · 2023-03-15 20:05:42

I wonder where the kids recently have got the idea that previous posts need to be included in their forum posts?

Is it an attention span thingy, maybe?

Anyhow, this is off topic.....

golinux · 2023-03-15 20:19:49

ralph.ronnquist wrote:

Anyhow, this is off topic.....

Not really . . . it is a sloppy habit that wastes Devuan bits. What has happened to "less is more"??

MrReplikant · 2023-03-15 23:01:20

ralph.ronnquist wrote:

I wonder where the kids recently have got the idea that previous posts need to be included in their forum posts?
Is it an attention span thingy, maybe?
Anyhow, this is off topic.....

As demonstrated here, it's not an attention span thingy, it's just nice to know what (or who) we are responding to

Now, if we're done being petty, does anyone have any ideas for this Freedombox situation?

Last edited by MrReplikant (2023-03-15 23:03:33)

golinux · 2023-03-15 23:33:22

@MrReplikant:

1. It is really not necessary to quote when the post being responded to is immediately previous to the response and visible on the screen.

2. "@whoever" works really well as an alternative.

3. Or just copy short passages to which you'd like to respond

MrReplikant wrote:

Now, if we're done being petty . . . ?

Really?! You can go stand in a corner now . . .

ralph.ronnquist · 2023-03-16 01:17:41

@MrReplicant, being defensive about sound behavioural advice won't serve you well in the long run.

Just to be petty: I think you really should have understood the sheer stupidity of including post #2 in post #3 especially when post #1 also was yours.

You see, a forum thread is generally intended to be a public group discussion where people advance the opening topic through a succession of discussion points adding expansions, explanations and viewpoints. It's not intended to be like a chat room with a series of (public) one-on-one exchanges. Hijacking the thread for a completely different topic, like we do here, is also very bad form.

It means in particular that each post implicitly concerns the thread topic as a whole. When you want to attach a note to something particular of a prior poster it might warrant quote, but in general one would only use quoting for the purpose of remarking on or highlighting the particular choice of words rather than the semantics.

And, there is never any need to quote a whole post like you did in post #3, since you would then rather refer to it by its sequence number.

In any case, I should also thank you for opening this opportunity to make this kind of public statement about that style of posting that had started to infect this forum. It will be interesting to see how that pans out in other topics in the future.

MrReplikant · 2023-03-16 04:58:57

Ya know what? I *was* gonna go on a much longer rant, but after multiple hours of contemplation finally decided not to waste the bytes or my breath. It was already becoming apparent before, but this thread is the straw that broke the camel's back, and made me come to the painful realization that I just do not jibe well with Devuan's culture, and probably never will. My efforts are better spent downstream with those more like myself. So, rather than make a nuisance of myself, or go the way of blackhole and try to fight with the administrative powers that be, I am just going to see myself out of this group peacefully and quietly and not bring forth any more conflict.

Anything I made for this distro will remain open for anyone who wants to fork and maintain them, but I will no longer maintain them myself.

Have fun fellas, wish you the best of luck.

Last edited by MrReplikant (2023-03-16 05:00:02)

The officially official Devuan Forum!

#1 2023-03-14 13:43:13

Freedombox is on the list of banned packages, what to do?

#2 2023-03-14 15:33:04

Re: Freedombox is on the list of banned packages, what to do?

#3 2023-03-15 13:15:50

Re: Freedombox is on the list of banned packages, what to do?

#4 2023-03-15 15:03:04

Re: Freedombox is on the list of banned packages, what to do?

#5 2023-03-15 20:05:42

Re: Freedombox is on the list of banned packages, what to do?

#6 2023-03-15 20:19:49

Re: Freedombox is on the list of banned packages, what to do?

#7 2023-03-15 23:01:20

Re: Freedombox is on the list of banned packages, what to do?

#8 2023-03-15 23:33:22

Re: Freedombox is on the list of banned packages, what to do?

#9 2023-03-16 01:17:41

Re: Freedombox is on the list of banned packages, what to do?

#10 2023-03-16 04:58:57

Re: Freedombox is on the list of banned packages, what to do?

Board footer