The GNU list of 'truly' free as in freedom distros

rufus · 2013-09-12 22:53:50

http://www.osalt.com/
butt yeah it envolves compromise.... not much in a lot of cases

progandy · 2013-09-12 23:10:16

But it is difficult - perhaps impossible - to find suitable recommendations. At least, I've not found them yet.

You might be interested in the Novena Laptop project. They are trying to create their own board using only free open sorce hardware with FOSS drivers.

Trilby · 2013-09-12 23:11:18

rufus wrote:

Lets not be offended and ,in essence, have an elitist attitude that is mean spirited ... Keep in mind that closed source proponants are the true (greedy) zealots. Closed source spauns viruses, selfishness, and is counter-productive to the linux community.

I don't know if I'm bothered more by the inflammatory generalization levied against all closed source development, or the stupifying irony of it following right after that other appeal.

I fully support an author's right to distribute the products of their labor and of their skill under any license they see fit. So I suppose I'm a greedy zealot?

I think it's greedy to mooch off of a community that offers so much for free, then complain about the bits that aren't free.

EDIT: for clarification - as at a very superficial level this may seem at odds with my previous post - I'd encourage all software developers to release their products under open source licenses, but I'd work just as hard to support their right to opt for a proprietary license. We should feel free to try to persuade people to share our view - we should not insult them and demand they change when they don't.

Last edited by Trilby (2013-09-12 23:13:52)

2ManyDogs · 2013-09-12 23:16:58

cfr wrote:

For example, as far as I can tell no complete desktop system - let alone laptop or tablet - meets the criteria FSF would need to recommend it.

Does Trisquel not meet the criteria? Or any of the BSDs? Perhaps I misunderstand the question.

[disclaimer]I use non-free software and have no dog in this fight. Although I would encourage Rufus to learn how to use a spellchecker.[/disclaimer]

cfr · 2013-09-12 23:27:09

Actually, yes. I remember now that I did find some places in the US and maybe Germany (?) which sold hardware known to work with free software. But I didn't find much in the UK - at least, I did find an option for a large laptop which might have worked with Linux (though probably not less binary blobs) and which I could have bought without an OS. But they'd stopped doing the smaller version and it might not have worked and it would have required binary blobs anyway.

Most recently, I've actually been looking for some sign of a tablet which might be able to run a non-locked-down version of Linux (with or without binary blobs). [That is, without jail breaking i.e. one which is intended to be run w/o being locked down.]

My point was actually that I can find information on hardware/software combos for all-free but not on compromises which may be the only practical option.

But there do seem to be some more options in other countries - at least for laptops. Don't know of anything tablet-wise.

Last edited by cfr (2013-09-12 23:28:11)

rufus · 2013-09-12 23:28:15

@Trilby you're right I was using that too loosely and I do support the right to market ones software.
so I apologise if you felt insulted. I think you agree though that free open software is a very selfless phenomenon.

Last edited by rufus (2013-09-12 23:29:46)

2ManyDogs · 2013-09-12 23:37:13

cfr wrote:

My point was actually that I can find information on hardware/software combos for all-free but not on compromises which may be the only practical option.

I think I must still be misunderstanding something. To me, Debian is a good example of a compromise -- you can enable the non-free repo if you need it, or keep it disabled if you want to run an all-free system. This does not satisfy the FSF, but it seems to fit your definition of compromise. It's not a tablet solution however.

Last edited by 2ManyDogs (2013-09-12 23:38:33)

progandy · 2013-09-12 23:43:32

cfr wrote:

Most recently, I've actually been looking for some sign of a tablet which might be able to run a non-locked-down version of Linux (with or without binary blobs).

I know there exist a few projects, I remember something with penguin...
Edit: I found it again. www.pengpod.com sells tablets as dualboot devices with linux and android

Last edited by progandy (2013-09-12 23:45:15)

Trilby · 2013-09-12 23:44:04

@Rufus, I didn't feel personally insulted - but I gladly accept the acknowledgement that it was applied too loosely. Charged topics such as this do tend to draw out strong words. So in such charged topics, we must all work to measure our statements carefuly - something that I am generally notoriously bad at.

Last edited by Trilby (2013-09-12 23:44:43)

cfr · 2013-09-12 23:52:07

2ManyDogs wrote:

cfr wrote:
My point was actually that I can find information on hardware/software combos for all-free but not on compromises which may be the only practical option.
I think I must still be misunderstanding something. To me, Debian is a good example of a compromise -- you can enable the non-free repo if you need it, or keep it disabled if you want to run an all-free system. This does not satisfy the FSF, but it seems to fit your definition of compromise. It's not a tablet solution however.

Yes but it is not a recommendation for hardware i.e. Debian will work fine on laptop X.

The FSF provides - at least in theory - information about hardware which supports fully free software. But when that isn't an option (because it just doesn't exist or isn't available in your country or is otherwise unsuitable), it is hard to find a reliable, central source of information about what hardware is suitable for a compromise.

For example, I assume the FSF would only recommend a tablet if it could be run with all free software. That's fine. But since that is not currently an option at all (as far as I know), I'd be interested in knowing if any compromises are available so that I could support moves towards free tablets even if I cannot currently have an ideally free one. I'm particularly interested in options which are intended to be used this way or which at least don't try to lock users in by voiding the warranty if they run something else on them. I can accept binary blobs in an imperfect world, but I don't want a tablet whose manufacturer thinks they have a right to decide what OS and what programmes I may or may not run on it. To me, that's a significant freedom, if an imperfect one, and I wish it were easier to find that sort of option.

Last edited by cfr (2013-09-12 23:52:28)

ewaller · 2013-09-12 23:56:33

I write both FOSS and proprietary code. They both have a place in life.

Consider the following 2 situations. First, there is the notion of programmable hardware -- think FPGAs (Field Programmable Gate Array). They are a hardware block whose behavior is defined by a binary blob. That binary blob is defined by VHDL or Verilog files that describe the hardware at the gate and register level. This allows the manufacturer to, in essence, update hardware once it is fielded. The binary blobs associated with drivers are often these configuration files. The contents of the hardware definition language files are the secret sauce that makes the hardware run. One could argue that the hardware should be open source as well. Okay, but how is the investment in the design protected? Copyright?

Second, there is the issue of legal compliance. The manufacturer of hardware is responsible for the performance of the hardware in the real world. There are electromagnetic compatibility requirements world wide that define the acceptable use of the spectrum. Open WiFi drivers would inevitably lead to abuse of the requirements by people who feel it is acceptable to use more bandwidth than permitted, or that boosting power is acceptable at the expense of others. I have seen inquiries on these forums as to how to violate local restrictions. As the manufacturers are liable, why would they want to enable this behavior by releasing the source?

rufus · 2013-09-13 00:12:00

point taken....

Kolt Penny · 2013-09-13 02:19:57

Xabre wrote:

wanted to check if the proprietary software in Arch was as relevant as, for example, Amazon packages on Ubuntu
On Arch you install what you want to install. and that's about all that needs to be said about it. There's no need to make any additional big philosophy or dire need to spend more time arguing about something that is entirely in your own control.
Arch is what it is, how will you use it is up to you.

Exactly. I like Arch because I learn a lot more than in other distros. This and MikeOS.

rufus · 2013-09-13 04:58:40

well thats great. I need to tell and remind all you young guys that were it not for free software there would be NO linux.

ngoonee · 2013-09-13 05:21:35

rufus wrote:

well thats great. I need to tell and remind all you young guys that were it not for free software there would be NO linux.

Really? Which came first, the chicken or the egg?

rufus · 2013-09-13 05:35:39

depends on which end your lOOkin into/at...

jakobcreutzfeldt · 2013-09-13 07:29:48

Kolt Penny wrote:

So, I was wandering around the internet when I found about Hurd and started investigating. Upon research I found this list in which basically you get all distros that have only free software but it got to my attention that ARch wasn't in it, only Parabola. But then I found another list explaining why they didn't ad other distros and the first one is Arch.
I quote:
"Arch has the two usual problems: there's no clear policy about what software can be included, and nonfree blobs are shipped with their kernel, Linux. Arch also has no policy about not distributing nonfree software through their normal channels."
http://www.gnu.org/distros/common-distros.en.html
I would like to see if any of you know the reason for the 'blobs' part.
Thanks in advance.

Parabola is nice because it's basically vanilla Arch with just an extra repository ('libre') of free-software equivalents of slightly non-free software (i.e. non-free art removed, patched to remove recommendations for non-free software, etc.). It's true that without binary blobs, some hardware won't work. On my laptop, I can't use my wifi adapter (Intel) and I can't use my SD card reader (I think...I never tried). Intel graphics, sound, ethernet, webcam etc work fine. You can also just install Arch, install linux-libre from the AUR and avoid non-free packages for mostly the same effect.

I won't participate in the rest of the conversation, since it's been hammered to death, except to say that I don't appreciate the word "fanatic" being thrown about. I don't at all feel that I'm a fanatic about things and I've met other free-software-only people who definitely wouldn't strike you as fanatic. I've been a member of this forum for a couple years now and I think others can attest that I don't fanatically hunt down people for supporting proprietary software.

I don't think it's 100% necessary, but a disclaimer: I'm the maintainer of a couple GNU packages and I'm a member of the GNU advisory board.

SquiddyBlob · 2013-09-13 09:43:56

Well we do not want to get stuck in a situation when we have to download our wireless drivers

drcouzelis · 2013-09-13 14:06:42

ngoonee wrote:

Kolt Penny wrote:
Well, I think they are saying that if you don't support only free software you automatically support privative software.
'Proprietary', not 'privative'.

The opposite of "free software" is "non-free software".

blackout23 wrote:

I'm glad that Arch doesn't follow some stupid ideology.

Arch Linux very much has an ideology. It's called "The Arch Way". You happen to agree with it, which makes it not stupid.

Awebb · 2013-09-13 15:31:39

ngoonee wrote:

rufus wrote:
well thats great. I need to tell and remind all you young guys that were it not for free software there would be NO linux.
Really? Which came first, the chicken or the egg?

I really wonder how this question survived the first formal logic analysis.

Masoud.N · 2013-09-13 15:42:40

Just to add to the discussion: There are some *free software only* hardware available.
http://www.lemote.com/en/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lemote
It's a Chinese based company that produces MIPS based 10.1" notebooks. I think RMS has one of these:
http://www.lemote.com/en/products/Noteb … 0/112.html

Awebb · 2013-09-13 20:36:48

Masoud.N wrote:

http://www.lemote.com/en/

I have never seen a company bragging this much about their Linux stuff. They made it sound like they cured cancer by accident, when they tried to compile Linux on MIPS.

Kolt Penny · 2013-09-13 22:54:26

ngoonee wrote:

rufus wrote:
well thats great. I need to tell and remind all you young guys that were it not for free software there would be NO linux.
Really? Which came first, the chicken or the egg?

GNU 1984.
Linux 1991.

Awebb · 2013-09-14 09:20:11

But probably without Linux, there would have been Hurd.

rufus · 2013-09-14 09:25:54

well probably/maybe they had a "free' operating system but no free kernal as timing and devine providence work
Linus started posting and had an early kernal going so the marriage was made and its been love ever since.....niters webb

Arch Linux

#26 2013-09-12 22:53:50

Re: The GNU list of 'truly' free as in freedom distros

#27 2013-09-12 23:10:16

Re: The GNU list of 'truly' free as in freedom distros

#28 2013-09-12 23:11:18

Re: The GNU list of 'truly' free as in freedom distros

#29 2013-09-12 23:16:58

Re: The GNU list of 'truly' free as in freedom distros

#30 2013-09-12 23:27:09

Re: The GNU list of 'truly' free as in freedom distros

#31 2013-09-12 23:28:15

Re: The GNU list of 'truly' free as in freedom distros

#32 2013-09-12 23:37:13

Re: The GNU list of 'truly' free as in freedom distros

#33 2013-09-12 23:43:32

Re: The GNU list of 'truly' free as in freedom distros

#34 2013-09-12 23:44:04

Re: The GNU list of 'truly' free as in freedom distros

#35 2013-09-12 23:52:07

Re: The GNU list of 'truly' free as in freedom distros

#36 2013-09-12 23:56:33

Re: The GNU list of 'truly' free as in freedom distros

#37 2013-09-13 00:12:00

Re: The GNU list of 'truly' free as in freedom distros

#38 2013-09-13 02:19:57

Re: The GNU list of 'truly' free as in freedom distros

#39 2013-09-13 04:58:40

Re: The GNU list of 'truly' free as in freedom distros

#40 2013-09-13 05:21:35

Re: The GNU list of 'truly' free as in freedom distros

#41 2013-09-13 05:35:39

Re: The GNU list of 'truly' free as in freedom distros

#42 2013-09-13 07:29:48

Re: The GNU list of 'truly' free as in freedom distros

#43 2013-09-13 09:43:56

Re: The GNU list of 'truly' free as in freedom distros

#44 2013-09-13 14:06:42

Re: The GNU list of 'truly' free as in freedom distros

#45 2013-09-13 15:31:39

Re: The GNU list of 'truly' free as in freedom distros

#46 2013-09-13 15:42:40

Re: The GNU list of 'truly' free as in freedom distros

#47 2013-09-13 20:36:48

Re: The GNU list of 'truly' free as in freedom distros

#48 2013-09-13 22:54:26

Re: The GNU list of 'truly' free as in freedom distros

#49 2013-09-14 09:20:11

Re: The GNU list of 'truly' free as in freedom distros

#50 2013-09-14 09:25:54

Re: The GNU list of 'truly' free as in freedom distros

Board footer