Re: [H-source-users] Shall we remove debian from h-node? (was Re: [bug #63209] devuan GNU/Linux not on list of supported distributions)

[bill-auger]

On Thu, 20 Oct 2022 10:57:41 -0600 Jeffrey wrote:
> ...perhaps detecting a proper kernel .config (via /boot/proc
> 
> If the issue is the default kernel maybe...detecting via uname with
> 'libre' version tagged in the right place would be acceptable?
>
> ...detect that (ie non-free firmware
> blobs)? perhaps with some help from vrms?

any of those are the general idea, i have been suggesting - there
are multiples ways to interrogate the running system, to
determine which code is actually running or installed


On Thu, 20 Oct 2022 10:57:41 -0600 Jeffrey wrote:
> and if someone *is* running a potato for a GPU (...or no graphics at
> all purely on server), a libre kernel with microcode and IME support
> completely disabled on top of a libreboot bios... should they be able
> to use hclient even if they *gasp* run debian(/devuan)?

CPU microcode and secondary processors are not a general concern;
because CPUs are not among the hardware categories - ie: it is
not possible to add an entry for a CPU - AFAIK microcodes do not
affect the freedom of any hardware other than the CPU

also, there is nothing special about "potatos" - most non-free
GPUs may be installed and used, without any non-free software;
and all computers can do "graphics" (2D and 3D) with or without a
dedicated GPU - the only difference is how efficiently they can
render graphics

WRT debian/devuan, i think those are no longer special either -
for the purpose of h-node, they are equivalent now, to any other
distro, which distributes non-free software - ie: if debian is
acceptable, then _every_ distro should be acceptable

that is not necessarily cause to exclude debian now - with
adequate diligence, and with server support, _everyone_ should
be able to use h-client, regardless of the distro, with no cause
for gasps - the distro names are an artificial constraint, with
relatively low informational value

that is a conspicuous peculiarity of this system, that there
ever needed to be constraints placed on which distros are
acceptable - i believe that it was done that way, only because it
was the simplest design to implement - and i believe that debian
was added because debian agreed to a cooperation - though i
could find no evidence that cooperation actually happened