[Freedombox-discuss] Intel Compute Stick
Jonas Smedegaard
dr at jones.dk
Wed Jan 14 12:24:57 UTC 2015
Quoting Sunil Mohan Adapa (2015-01-14 06:25:17)
> On Wednesday 14 January 2015 03:42 AM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
>> Quoting Sunil Mohan Adapa (2015-01-13 21:05:38)
>>> On Wednesday 14 January 2015 01:08 AM, Blibbet wrote:
>>>> To me it is unsuitable for a FreedomBox due to firmware, which is
>>>> probably UEFI-based if hardware comes from Intel.
>>>
>>> Indeed, proprietary firmware is a deal breaker.
>>
>> You mean UEFI specifically, or that *any* use of proprietary firmware
>> is a deal breaker?
>
> I meant any proprietary firmware including WiFi firmware needed for
> most single board computers with WiFi capability (by relying USB WiFi
> devices).
>
>> Makes sense to me to steer free of proprietary code whereever
>> possible, and we have enough options not requiring proprietary
>> firmware injected at boot time, but I think it is too early to set
>> the bar so high as to require no proprietary firmware exist soldered
>> onto the board.
>
> If the proprietary firmware is not executed (or can be disabled), say
> for an optional hardware component, then I guess we can live with it.
>
> I do agree that it might be too early though. We can confirm a few
> free working options and then look at this direction.
>
>>
>> If you mean only UEFI, then why avoid that specifically? Yes, I know
>> that Free firmware like Coreboot is better when offered (which is not
>> the case currently), but how is e.g. proprietary BIOS better?
>>
>>
>>> We should consider promising FreedomBox users images and devices
>>> with only free software and firmware. Especially since we do seem
>>> to have some viable hardware options. In the last meeting everyone
>>> seem to agree that we should remove non-free repositories from
>>> FreedomBox images wherever possible. This would be a step further.
>>
>> What do you mean by "whereever possible" in above? Is non-free
>> Debian repositories less of a deal breaker than UEFI or other
>> pre-loaded proprietary firmware? If so, why?
>
> We are currently using non-free repositories for all FreedomBox
> images, even VirtualBox images. We only had a brief discussion but
> from what I understand the agreement was to remove non-free
> repositories from images where it is not needed, such as from
> VirtualBox and BeagleBone images. There was no discussion on what to
> do about hardware that requires non-free software.
>
> In my opinion, pre-loaded proprietary firmware is as bad as non-free
> Debian repositories particularly if that firmware is replaceable.
>
>> ****
>>
>> 60 boards now for sale arguably match or surpass the DreamPlug.
>> Makes sense to me to raise the bar higher, but not arbitrarily.
>>
>> We could add a requirement that the board must not use UEFI (if that
>> is sensible - see my question above). That would still leave is with
>> 55 options.
>
> I believe we should consider generalizing this for any non-free
> firmware. The idea is that all software and firmware on FreedomBox
> shall be free. If we do this (and pull off a nicely working
> FreedomBox), many of our users will appreciate the fully freely
> aspect.
> It will become a strong point for FreedomBox adoption.
I agree with that - further down the road. Seems you agree with me that
it is not realistic to be strict about *now*.
>> We could add a requirement that the board must be Open Hardware.
>> That would leave us with 12 options from 3 vendors.
>
> I don't think we should do this. At least, not yet. We should
> certainly prioritize Open Hardware though.
So essentially, in your opinion, we should not raise the bar now?
- Jonas
--
* Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
* Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/
[x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 949 bytes
Desc: signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/freedombox-discuss/attachments/20150114/f5bb7f45/attachment.sig>
More information about the Freedombox-discuss
mailing list