Devuan 2.0 ASCII Release Candidate

alexkemp · 2018-05-16 21:24:56

Essikario wrote:

The only very very very bad thing is the use of "contrib" and "non-free" with the default install …
Debian: only free software (good) + systemd (bad)
Devuan: proprietary software (very very very bad)

You need to persuade computer equipment manufacturers to all provide source code for their device microcode (good luck with that), or to stop using closed-source microcode devices. Whilst the mfcs continue to only provide binary blobs Devuan (and Debian) will need to support ‘non-free’ software.

Debian & Devuan are identical in their treatment of non-free sources.

Before loading Devuan Jessie on this computer I had Debian Jessie loaded. sources.list for me had “main contrib non-free” else no wifi & my grandkids would stop visiting.

You are perfectly free to howl at the moon and spit into the wind as much as you wish. However, the whole of the world uses wifi/you-name-it that requires binary blobs to be loaded as microcode. If that is not present at installation the install will fail for many & yet another potential user will tell all their friends that “Devuan is broken”.

I understand that many zealots are proud of walking around with no noses. In my opinion that is a foolish decision, and an impractical one. Nevertheless I will support to the hilt your decision to cut off your own nose to spite the closed-source manufacturers. I draw the line, however, at any demand for everyone else to get out their knives.

ivanovnegro · 2018-05-16 21:39:45

Hello Dev1 community!

Oh boy I installed this nice thing yesterday. I thought before I fight with systemd on Debian 9 why not at least try this new Debian based dish. It goes smoothly like tiramisu.

I was actually happy that it installed automatically my wifi drivers. In Debian proper I have to use Ethernet to install and add them afterwards and play with the sources list or hunt for the non free unofficial image. Not sure about the non free thingy here but I liked it. I used the graphical install for a change and it asked me if I wanted to use the proprietary driver.

What can I say. I was lurking a little bit here since yesterday and liked what I saw, the RC. It is very very stable. I installed it with the Mate desktop.

Yes, gksu works and yes, I added the xfc4-power-manager to Mate. I guess, no I am sure, that nowadays Mate's power manager needs systemd or some of the dependencies therefore the package does not exist in Devuan.

I even added backports without issues for e.g. LibreOffice.

I am really pleased.

I am not a big opponent of systemd but I always preferred sysv or even openrc and even more obscure inits. Long live the diversity and variety!

You seem to be a crazy bunch, I like that, I even recognized some of you.

Greetings from the LinuxBBQ from my part! Who knows we could base a sick release on Devuan in the future.

A screenshot or it never happened:

figdev · 2018-05-16 23:51:00

Whilst the mfcs continue to only provide binary blobs Devuan (and Debian) will need to support ‘non-free’ software.
Debian & Devuan are identical in their treatment of non-free sources.

anti-fud disclaimer: i have never (even once) claimed that devuan installs non-free software. ever. one of the devuan devs mentioned an instance in an old beta, and there are new reports here, accurate or otherwise. im not here to comment on those as im sure katolaz will either fix or debunk them. now to address the text ive quoted:

so far, debian and devuan are identical in their treatment of non-free sources.

you are incorrect that devuan or debian "needs to" support non-free software.

you incorrectly refer to those who disagree with your position as "zealots" but you should know how many people you are insulting with that label.

* one: you are insulting me. im sure that doesnt bother you.
* two: katolaz feels the same way about non-free that i do, more or less.
* three: it might interest you that jaromil heads an organisation with such a distro (dyne:bolic) that is on the fsf-approved list.

while i have never complained (maybe once in 2015) that devuan includes non-free software in its installer, there is nothing wrong with doing so.

your blanket statement is dubious; there are developers leading and maintaining devuan who have not chosen to support non-free software, a fact which stands against your claim.

youre welcome to your opinion, but given its one-sidedness i would still point out that it isnt factual-- at all. i mean, theres a very hard line against "fud" around here (so much that its unproductive and encourages the sort of post im making now) but what you said is fud on the other end of the spectrum.

its devuan gnu+linux, check the website. that "gnu" part actually stands for the very thing youre speaking against.

also, when youre making statements against a free software distribution with (for the most part) free software developers, you might point out any personal work you do that would conflict with developers having such a position--

youre calling jaromil and katolaz and myself "zealots" (whether you realise that or not) but there is no full disclaimer as to where you fall on the spectrum or why you might make those comments here, eh? it might be appropriate since youre new here-- and since it may have something to do with your biased statement.

"init freedom" and "software freedom" are related, at least.

Last edited by figdev (2018-05-17 00:35:35)

alexkemp · 2018-05-17 01:00:03

figdev wrote:

you are incorrect that devuan or debian "needs to" support non-free software.
you incorrectly refer to those who disagree with your position as "zealots"

Hmm. I'm sorry that you are upset by my comments.

One of my early experiences with Debian was of a thwarted install attempt with a friend due to their device employing only Wifi, no Ethernet. The installer that I used did not have any non-free software in it and, whilst their device worked to a point, it could not be updated and that left it crippled. My position, therefore, is that Debian/Devuan NEEDS to have non-free software support for the sake of such machines.

I came up through the era of software modems, which iirc never provided any Linux support. Hardware modems were orders of magnitude more expensive. If you could not afford a hardware modem you could not run Linux.

I understand and support the position of all that want to stay pure & close to the ideal of Free Software. If they then say that the installer should not offer non-free binaries (to enforce their ideals), I believe that a line has been crossed into zealotry and oppose it.

I see that you have stated that “there is nothing wrong with doing so” (including non-free software in the installer), and therefore am a little puzzled at your upset. Anyway, maybe this will help to make my previous post a little clearer.

figdev · 2018-05-17 01:07:46

first of all the paragraph where i said "theres nothing wrong with doing so" was poorly worded and vague-- i was referring to the part about complaining (nothing wrong with that.) it was not an effort to confuse, just poorly worded on my part.

I understand and support the position of all that want to stay pure & close to the ideal of Free Software.

thats fine, even if it werent so (i wont call you a liar unless theres far more evidence, even if i will compare this to your next statement...)

If they then say that the installer should not offer non-free binaries (to enforce their ideals), I believe that a line has been crossed into zealotry and oppose it.

again-- wont call you a liar, you were confused by a statement i worded poorly and now its my turn--

you say that you understand and support the position of all that want to stay pure & close to the ideal of free software...

but then as soon as someone actually advocates that position, you call it zealotry? theres what i find odd. and still no disclaimer-- hmm. fine, i wont ask again.

i already said youre entitled to your opinion and you still are. i wish the extent you were willing to "support" the idea of keeping non-free software out of free software included not calling it zealotry, but as long as i can take a moment to critique it, i suppose alls fair enough.

i had a hardware modem too, and while i could get on the web using arachne and dos-- i couldnt connect to my isp using free software for anything! "oh you must have a softmodem." "very soft, thank you, but its connected to the serial port and i can connect with dos, im pretty sure this isnt a winmodem!"

Last edited by figdev (2018-05-17 01:10:13)

KatolaZ · 2018-05-17 08:34:59

I think we should all calm down a bit :-)

Just to clarify:

1) Devuan has decided to provide non-free firmware packages in the install media, and this is not due to change at the moment.

2) Nevertheless, it would be better to always ask the users if they want to use those firmware at install time or not. There seem to be a glitch in hw-detect (one of the d-i components) which does not ask the question under some conditions, and installs the needed non-free firmware anyway. We are trying to understand why and will fix it, hopefully before the next release.

There is little point into flaming, IMHO. I hope at least as many contributors wuold be willing to test the fixes before the next release ;-)

Just shout on #devuan-dev.

Nili · 2018-05-17 10:00:48

@ivanovnegro Hi mate, Welcome! Glad to have you here and thanks for sharing your first impressions

Enjoy and Best regards!

golinux · 2018-05-17 16:34:40

ivanovnegro wrote:

Greetings from the LinuxBBQ from my part! Who knows we could base a sick release on Devuan in the future.

Welcome to Devuan. Would be interesting to see what LinuxBBQ can come up with!

boycottsystemd · 2018-05-17 20:17:48

Hello, thank you all working on Devuan. I'm looking forward release version

I'm sorry I can't mount logical disk using PCManFM in ASCII RC, LXDE or OpenBox:

Not authorized to perform operation.

alexkemp · 2018-05-17 21:42:50

boycottsystemd wrote:

I can't mount logical disk

Hi boycottsystemd. That error msg suggests that you are attempting a root operation whilst logged in as a normal user. If so, then it is probably a setup issue.

I do not think that this topic is the place for hard/software support, but here is a typical Arch-linux help-link: https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=180353

Geoff 42 · 2018-05-18 09:16:27

boycottsystemd wrote:

can't mount logical disk using PCManFM in ASCII RC, LXDE or OpenBox:

I am happily using SpaceFM instead of PCManFM. It can use udevil to mount disks.

https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=430#p430

Geoff

Last edited by Geoff 42 (2018-05-18 09:20:37)

Vizitor · 2018-06-08 20:42:03

boycottsystemd wrote:

can't mount logical disk using PCManFM in ASCII RC, LXDE or OpenBox:

I had similar problem with mounting disks/partitions under ASCII;
Solved by creating file:
/etc/polkit-1/localauthority/50-local.d/whatewernameYouPick.pkla

[Storage Permissions]
Identity=unix-user:your_user_name
Action=org.freedesktop.udisks2.filesystem-mount;org.freedesktop.udisks2.filesystem-mount-system;org.freedesktop.udisks2.filesystem-mount-other-seat;org.freedesktop.udisks2.filesystem-unmount-others;org.freedesktop.udisks2.encrypted-unlock;org.freedesktop.udisks2.encrypted-unlock-system;org.freedesktop.udisks2.encrypted-unlock-other-seat;
ResultAny=yes
ResultInactive=yes
ResultActive=yes

boycottsystemd · 2018-07-06 10:12:00

Vizitor wrote:

boycottsystemd wrote:
can't mount logical disk using PCManFM in ASCII RC, LXDE or OpenBox:
I had similar problem with mounting disks/partitions under ASCII;
Solved by creating file:
/etc/polkit-1/localauthority/50-local.d/whatewernameYouPick.pkla
[Storage Permissions]
Identity=unix-user:your_user_name
Action=org.freedesktop.udisks2.filesystem-mount;org.freedesktop.udisks2.filesystem-mount-system;org.freedesktop.udisks2.filesystem-mount-other-seat;org.freedesktop.udisks2.filesystem-unmount-others;org.freedesktop.udisks2.encrypted-unlock;org.freedesktop.udisks2.encrypted-unlock-system;org.freedesktop.udisks2.encrypted-unlock-other-seat;
ResultAny=yes
ResultInactive=yes
ResultActive=yes

Thank you (and to others), this has solved my issue.

The officially official Devuan Forum!

#26 2018-05-16 21:24:56

Re: Devuan 2.0 ASCII Release Candidate

#27 2018-05-16 21:39:45

Re: Devuan 2.0 ASCII Release Candidate

#28 2018-05-16 23:51:00

Re: Devuan 2.0 ASCII Release Candidate

#29 2018-05-17 01:00:03

Re: Devuan 2.0 ASCII Release Candidate

#30 2018-05-17 01:07:46

Re: Devuan 2.0 ASCII Release Candidate

#31 2018-05-17 08:34:59

Re: Devuan 2.0 ASCII Release Candidate

#32 2018-05-17 10:00:48

Re: Devuan 2.0 ASCII Release Candidate

#33 2018-05-17 16:34:40

Re: Devuan 2.0 ASCII Release Candidate

#34 2018-05-17 20:17:48

Re: Devuan 2.0 ASCII Release Candidate

#35 2018-05-17 21:42:50

Re: Devuan 2.0 ASCII Release Candidate

#36 2018-05-18 09:16:27

Re: Devuan 2.0 ASCII Release Candidate

#37 2018-06-08 20:42:03

Re: Devuan 2.0 ASCII Release Candidate

#38 2018-07-06 10:12:00

Re: Devuan 2.0 ASCII Release Candidate

Board footer