GNU Linux-Libre 5.17 Released For Free Software Purists

[SigHunter]

I’m always confused why people attack this project so much. It’s Linux without closed source BLOBS. Blobs that should also have source code and documentation.

If you buy the right hardware you don’t need any of closed source BLOBs anyway….

that's not the case here. linux by default is without closed source blobs if you don't include any while compiling. at least on gentoo that is the default and manual work is required to include binary blobs for your firmware. linux-libre is linux without the ability to load this firmware.
so the goal is maybe to have a system you can trust more, because it technically isn't able to load any untrusted blobs

somebody correct me if I'm wrong here

[Vistaus]

Because here the majority are M$ fan boys despite is a Linux webiste...

Since when is Phoronix a Linux website? Michael also covers macOS news, Haiku news, BSD news, etc.

[Danielsan]

Since when is Phoronix a Linux website? Michael also covers macOS news, Haiku news, BSD news, etc.

Mostly linux-y...

would be better?

[OneTimeShot]

“somebody correct me if I'm wrong here”

Linux Libre is about making hardware work the best it can without firmware. So do more than just “don’t work”. Also they remove blobs hard coded into source code.

obviously you could just delete the firmware folder, but then you’d usually just end up with a non-booting machine…

[chocolate]

+1

The real solution to the firmware blobs situation is to start making free and open source hardware, not break compatibility because you don't like having proprietary firmware for proprietary hardware.

If you remove the firmware from the equation, the device is still a black box that can screw you over in any way imaginable.

I hope you do realize this kernel is still needed after such friendly hardware arrives. You and all the others mocking this initiative have absolutely no point whatsoever.

[chocolate]

Imagine being on the web, able to go to anywhere at anytime to build up an informed opinion before voicing it publicly, and still making the completely deliberate choice to come off as an illiterate snob who is old enough to type sentences on a forum, but not mentally mature enough not to confuse pareto-efficient freedom with anarchy.

Muh freedom to do whatever the hell I want is in peril! They're seizing muh hardware at gun point!
That's how you all sound when you infallibly cede control of your person to the already established neural path of mocking Linux-libre for the little dopamine doing so nets you.
Stop.

[Developer12]

https://ariadne.space/2022/01/22/the-fsfs-relationship-with-firmware-is-harmful-to-free-software-users/

The ideas that linux-libre is based on are deeply flawed.

[Developer12]

https://twitter.com/mjg59/status/1377402589386432512

"Again reminded of https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/info-gnu/2018-04/msg00002.html…, in which a GNU project removes a warning message informing users that their CPU microcode leaves them vulnerable to CPU microarchitectural attacks" -Matthew Garrett

Yeah. Really defending the users there. /s

[jaypatelani]

They need GPLv3 kernel. Nice to have these projects actively developing

[chocolate]

"I hate that Linux-libre forces me to admit my hardware isn't ideal when going by the definition kindly laid out and merely suggested by the FSF, therefore I wish for everybody else to disregard what the FSF says, to ignore the RYF certification, and to mock Linux-libre on every occasion."

Developer12 That's just like, their opinion, man.
Do you have yours? Or do I have to accept your argument on the basis of an authority bias involving a third party that lectures people about software freedom... on Twitter?

What the FSF thinks is crystal clear: either software passes through your hands, and it's meant for reprogrammable components, and thus needs to be free software, or it doesn't pass through your hands, and if it's hidden from view, then it's just part of the hardware, and therefore not a concern of the Free Software Foundation.
Those people waste their time writing nonsense because, fundamentally, they don't understand what the role of the FSF is. Purity over subjective "pragmatism"? Of course. Why be surprised?

The FSF has no business with me gaming like crazy on Linux thanks to an AMD CPU+GPU machine full of blobs here and there. Why should I have business with them sticking to their lines in the sand?
I praise Linux-libre because it's legitimate in general, and also useful on some machines and for their users. Useful is relative, legitimate is absolute.

If you want nuance, if you want tiers of certification in terms of how well a given hardware can run mainline Linux, then... that's also perfectly legitimate, just ask the Linux Foundation instead.