Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> (2023-01-22):

On Sun, Jan 22, 2023 at 04:24:12PM +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote:

Template: apt-setup/non-free-firmware
Type: boolean
Default: false

don't we want to default this to true?

Why would we enable non-free-firmware if there's no use for it?
hw-detect makes that determination, based on contents prepared by
debian-cd.


Cheers,
--
Cyril Brulebois (kibi@debian.org) <https://debamax.com/>
D-I release manager -- Release team member -- Freelance Consultant

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEtg6/KYRFPHDXTPR4/5FK8MKzVSAFAmPNXd0ACgkQ/5FK8MKz VSCE6Q/8CoVKItz6cFX9IZ/NWM4pU246FoIuNsExOxW5UO6dULYJG/U1rzE30664 sce1u+rpbeSmIdkp9IhNnQmz5Y/0mVkmy1Hu2w5Qc8IbxaHSdiCsy9/kdpYP076y yYHDQpCvDBHTiJDEd7NTXcm4BXQdHKNiAHkPFxjfbaEOSp3r/42wMrtvcTANWsAk SM3725dINvE5LlFkM44BPoraGBZtAP4o3lYNaRdDM/I2r+CelshRhgdc5hOAFYsr hqJLiYxhCqK2fgOnyF9aJu8YYmrJo5+pNbwMUvVrQByr0fvy4ArIf1nJ065Z7u7a daOsjHlG/kq+tq7uyukE4ES38uyzBjfNwHaFQja2mkvKntY7Zk509pvcLsFCT3bJ wDj1+ttQovxpEnvj0CPWc3AWeENCKEAVBtTv1DRtcZhhlp/ng46o2qpDBj6aWvoc QdnwmxBp++zunVNVk4Cov/mxYtogQZeNEx0+t2o9qjrFR9h457cnmt8BmJPqNOdu V7oJOvBgKxj4EYH483PuqoKazFDl3ApGZRgdFRXRM1QsnrOHW3l3w0X4GN5o8U1y TugrXD5ReRTbslbezNLcsSiUE9rTfIx/j2DwJV+0q8ykIxVkmcoZ14IvFGSo40MV lY+D1ozTvpv37kaDUHwIXXxN0vnZQ6UZPMShaa8oADY7jByIuds=
=hPL9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
*

Hi,

(I seem to remember d-l-e is where people could ask for some review,
making sure original strings are fine before asking people to translate anything, hence the copy; plus Holger for the sublevel stuff towards the
end.)

Quick update: I think I have hw-detect and debian-cd mostly ready at
this point (and selected packages are currently being moved from
non-free to non-free-firwmare by their maintainers), and I'm moving on
to polishing apt-setup.


At the moment we have the following templates, only used at priority low (expert mode), asking whether contrib and/or non-free should be enabled:

Template: apt-setup/contrib
Type: boolean
Default: false
# :sl1:
_Description: Use contrib software?
Some additional software has been made to work with Debian. Though this
software is free, it depends on non-free software for its operation. This
software is not a part of Debian, but standard Debian tools can be
used to install it.
.
Please choose whether you want this software to be made available to you.

Template: apt-setup/non-free
Type: boolean
Default: false
# :sl1:
_Description: Use non-free software?
Some non-free software has been made to work with Debian. Though this
software is not at all a part of Debian, standard Debian tools can be used
to install it. This software has varying licenses which may prevent you
from using, modifying, or sharing it.
.
Please choose whether you want to have it available anyway.

Therefore I've drafted the following for apt-setup/non-free-firmware:

Template: apt-setup/non-free-firmware
Type: boolean
Default: false
# :sl5:
_Description: Use non-free firmware?
Some non-free firmware has been made to work with Debian. Though this
firmware is not at all a part of Debian, standard Debian tools can be used
to install it. This firmware has varying licenses which may prevent you
from using, modifying, or sharing it.
.
Please choose whether you want to have it available anyway.

Differences:
- non-free → non-free-firmware
- software → firmware
- :sl1: → :sl5:

I don't think we need to go into more details about why there are
different components, why non-free-firmware was split out of non-free,
etc. After all, those questions are only asked in expert mode, and
I'd hope expert users to have heard about our move to supporting this
new non-free-firmware component… Hopefully we'll have some release notes about it, possibly installation guide updates, etc.


I've selected sublevel 5 instead of sublevel 1, to make sure this isn't
going to hurt the translation status (which localechooser uses to warn
against incomplete translations at the very beginning of the
installation process). Since that template is only shown in expert mode,
and since we're adding /pretty late/ in the release cycle, I'd be happy
to have translations if translators jump on it, and “sed” the non-free
on into non-free-firmware, but we shouldn't block on this… I'll let
Holger comment about that part and possibly propose different plans.


Thanks for your help!


Cheers,
--
Cyril Brulebois (kibi@debian.org) <https://debamax.com/>
D-I release manager -- Release team member -- Freelance Consultant

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEtg6/KYRFPHDXTPR4/5FK8MKzVSAFAmPNVRkACgkQ/5FK8MKz VSDRWg/8DrHFOmo4iaPpxvTwlIGOjvMsSTt9NC8pyge1LWYYiy6LSUj0+PyjUJD+ PXsQ15hx5HezUBt/tiJKC91ATcbZk14gQt5XRv8f0a1JNKXHccikxKF9p7QMBX5+ Cy7a3YUiE1Bo1gr+8ld7pdJx2CYjtxYYCWq1NtXDSmoF8tkENHkcpp/hjKDzy8k6 oA3Ms/+07xm9dVanEplm5pdaVtqQQ9/Pai7CYlP6PsfPzongN3+Q7zy2SPTw4xL6 PYcVuXhFZIhJfM5k3+c6Rc18witqq0WNkxmNt28rQMUXjX07MIUCO3ntEQdr2JqD G5T4CgNkNZPP9t+sf62SO/YXfDyB3GFFtexUCrixL9nj7nksmOcIDJ7oHii/UsuW iiOosmwE6Co6uAngT7eN3LvAi+h4oSjtWdqfTwK02yOaSHhCzIW3dmGT8ce8Lzzx JAlkicIJhJjSaDUTSkDjXIrcp/DsZncH6jZhboAACc7a/PVwIMi4RRAlKA+ZcAuh E+ZhrVjxRlXaO5JGvNHYe8nwwR2kw1a91ICkANZFC0032Yza33mE5zTq6q3ku1td IGOXwFouwMdL2lyfq2Z4EPCd7qNc0djFDSCzIdkTRaYfShpyHBu2FsDxssGuYiKk 7Jd+oZFgP9jgnPQuU4qSfMN3N85SX48EB4v044a9wJgJv6BrITQ=
=bLZw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
*

On Sun, Jan 22, 2023 at 04:24:12PM +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote:

Template: apt-setup/non-free-firmware
Type: boolean
Default: false

don't we want to default this to true?


--
cheers,
Holger

⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ OpenPGP: B8BF54137B09D35CF026FE9D 091AB856069AAA1C
⠈⠳⣄

blockchaineinträge sind wie liebesschlösser an brückengeländern. ja, die dinger haben eine gewisse security, aber das anhängen ist ein rein symbolischer akt, ohne garantie, dass es ernst gemeint ist. was bleibt ist kitsch, dessen kosten auf die gemeinschaft abgewälzt werden. (@mspro)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEuL9UE3sJ01zwJv6dCRq4VgaaqhwFAmPNXK4ACgkQCRq4Vgaa qhybYxAAqSLF2uSvmAWQJAE1ZREdWJ8kjUJC4BqQvFpTQtbBZBbzjncyq1ldaZYd tmRBrQ3hn9uHgTnCd168j4EBVoR3A7xlX4Hbc9ct7KGBPtz/gI36YclgumvD+9mX troEHfnvCRe2V+OsbiTptA+e2GHsFyO3HzD/Y5jSW2ko0C7fWcUvZwBP6wwwqZ/6 t3eebsE1uA8v3OvuXiUetK329LttJ6Vk74ERqRG4zNdQrZ+Raaw+DaV+e/1mmmUP zKAloHCFxRyxI2SUyF6VEKUH3NPPimXWBndSdmn/dEuRW8LNkPnnpWMYrxvaS43Z UZexmIQ56zFoAHjLqpNGoWLq4MrIk0zcOqcu1IjYTfc921T988C79DjgACSzKG3w UGaq2FRDcM2vcI3KO

Cyril Brulebois wrote:

(I seem to remember d-l-e is where people could ask for some review,
making sure original strings are fine before asking people to translate anything, hence the copy; plus Holger for the sublevel stuff towards the end.)

tldr: looks good to me.

Quick update: I think I have hw-detect and debian-cd mostly ready at
this point (and selected packages are currently being moved from
non-free to non-free-firwmare by their maintainers), and I'm moving on
to polishing apt-setup.

At the moment we have the following templates, only used at priority low (expert mode), asking whether contrib and/or non-free should be enabled:

Template: apt-setup/contrib
Type: boolean
Default: false
# :sl1:
_Description: Use contrib software?
Some additional software has been made to work with Debian. Though this
software is free, it depends on non-free software for its operation. This
software is not a part of Debian, but standard Debian tools can be
used to install it.
.
Please choose whether you want this software to be made available to you.

Template: apt-setup/non-free
Type: boolean
Default: false
# :sl1:
_Description: Use non-free software?
Some non-free software has been made to work with Debian. Though this
software is not at all a part of Debian, standard Debian tools can be used
to install it. This software has varying licenses which may prevent you
from using, modifying, or sharing it.
.
Please choose whether you want to have it available anyway.

Therefore I've drafted the following for apt-setup/non-free-firmware:

Template: apt-setup/non-free-firmware
Type: boolean
Default: false
# :sl5:
_Description: Use non-free firmware?
Some non-free firmware has been made to work with Debian. Though this

The phrasing "made to work with" has always struck me as poor, since
there are two obvious misinterpretations - "created in order to work
on" or "forced to work on" Debian. All we mean is things are
organised so that it's made *available* for use on Debian. But is
there a better short way of saying that? At any rate I don't think
it's worth slowing down this update.

firmware is not at all a part of Debian, standard Debian tools can be used
to install it. This firmware has varying licenses which may prevent you
from using, modifying, or sharing it.
.
Please choose whether you want to have it available anyway.

Differences:
- non-free → non-free-firmware
- software → firmware
- :sl1: → :sl5:

I don't think we need to go into more details about why there are
different components, why non-free-firmware was split out of non-free,
etc. After all, those questions are only asked in expert mode, and
I'd hope expert users to have heard about our move to supporting this
new non-free-firmware component… Hopefully we'll have some release notes about it, possibly installation guide updates, etc.

In theory users might even think "well, if it's possible that I'm not
allowed to *use* them I'd better read the licenses first", in which
case they'll need to go through some awkward contortions, and if we
aren't going into *those* details... (As far as I know it's only ever
stuff along the lines of "you aren't licensed to use this firmware on
hardware that it has no chance of working with", but I suppose there
*could* be firmware under a JSON-style "may only be used for good,
not evil" license. Tough luck, lawful evil d-i users.)

I've selected sublevel 5 instead of sublevel 1, to make sure this isn't
going to hurt the translation status (which localechooser uses to warn against incomplete translations at the very beginning of the
installation process). Since that template is only shown in expert mode,
and since we're adding /pretty late/ in the release cycle, I'd be happy
to have translations if translators jump on it, and “sed” the non-free
on into non-free-firmware, but we shouldn't block on this… I'll let
Holger comment about that part and possibly propose different plans.

Fortunately most translators should have a fairly easy job rendering
the English word "firmware" into their own language!
--
JBR with qualifications in linguistics, experience as a Debian
sysadmin, and probably no clue about this particular package

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Hi,

Cyril Brulebois <kibi@debian.org> wrote (Sun, 22 Jan 2023 16:24:12 +0100):

Template: apt-setup/non-free-firmware
Type: boolean
Default: false
# :sl5:
_Description: Use non-free firmware?
Some non-free firmware has been made to work with Debian. Though this
firmware is not at all a part of Debian, standard Debian tools can be used
to install it. This firmware has varying licenses which may prevent you
from using, modifying, or sharing it.
.
Please choose whether you want to have it available anyway.

Looks good to me (being not a native English speaker, though).

I've selected sublevel 5 instead of sublevel 1, to make sure this isn't
going to hurt the translation status (which localechooser uses to warn against incomplete translations at the very beginning of the
installation process). Since that template is only shown in expert mode,
and since we're adding /pretty late/ in the release cycle, I'd be happy
to have translations if translators jump on it, and “sed” the non-free
on into non-free-firmware, but we shouldn't block on this… I'll let
Holger comment about that part and possibly propose different plans.

+1

Nothing more to add here from my side
Good work


Holger

--
Holger Wansing <hwansing@mailbox.org>
PGP-Fingerprint: 496A C6E8 1442 4B34 8508 3529 59F1 87CA 156E B076

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> (2023-01-22):

On Sun, Jan 22, 2023 at 05:01:36PM +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote:

don't we want to default this to true?

Why would we enable non-free-firmware if there's no use for it?
hw-detect makes that determination, based on contents prepared by debian-cd.

a. ah, I wasn't aware of this. thanks.

That's why I mentioned work on hw-detect and debian-cd…

b. to support pluggable hw not present at installation time?

How would that help? People will still need to install packages anyway.


Anyway, going back to what was agreed upon in the GR vote:

Where non-free firmware is found to be necessary, the target system
will also be configured to use the non-free-firmware component by
default in the apt sources.list file.

That doesn't quite say we enable non-free-firmware unconditionally.


Cheers,
--
Cyril Brulebois (kibi@debian.org) <https://debamax.com/>
D-I release manager -- Release team member -- Freelance Consultant

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEtg6/KYRFPHDXTPR4/5FK8MKzVSAFAmPNZKAACgkQ/5FK8MKz VSCoew/+OR+qCXMmO+mcBzMdCglB3G8QHaGqw/FFviFsZLo6OfCisenlo7QATs2Z kWCO7Pd7pHp6aib5wgNMN7has3+Tl0BcGjwWOdF4cRnlSUYjVqHXdQZsE5Va+l1Y pCliZJvhZ7UtYeBsby5qvWYPzkx0DsCV9GHxDcAEI4tx7ZctFSo2uzQwwmVSSkTw YSxByJXjRQ9GBEetr6UI4TqE2x8TJQloGdf4ehC86XLYOApzukHGZYOaNjBroQgw Y+LOl/xehrAGpyAluo686mpK9t5srsDKev59iX9CxgdznGIS+UyvFqTax2YoNa8H Wj4c4AeC0UOX0u18NOp7M8lhbPCac6vwOlEaZ7wghQEsvaPrFdiqoHb/Djlgmcir oTT4qoA0tTcknrK3IH0Ezlr7cfC5/qviR8NWSyElyQYFIWhfK4UXznw2yL006/dl D9oQiYsv1mA6f1IYWhQ9BpMJH+xxB2xc257jokK7gfqw7ePboYI5LO9IYcxbUDqJ 44bF6rVv8IBM4DSxRb9tVfoUNn5/erCsi6H7nfBbp9ocV+UowcDCdepgSnOSJv/g WJFroBMd00tX7Z4KrD6COhGazaYp5lFa/bZIzCcMVq5mhPlSt2pMGQS3FpHnyc2c Dpd6IKb9Z7Nir+vuH05it3a1NvhaolByx0q+BHH3pkhf5+M6otY=
=tok+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
*

On Sun, Jan 22, 2023 at 05:01:36PM +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote:

don't we want to default this to true?

Why would we enable non-free-firmware if there's no use for it?
hw-detect makes that determination, based on contents prepared by
debian-cd.

a. ah, I wasn't aware of this. thanks.
b. to support pluggable hw not present at installation time?


--
cheers,
Holger

⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ OpenPGP: B8BF54137B09D35CF026FE9D 091AB856069AAA1C
⠈⠳⣄

These heat waves aren’t tragedies, they’re crimes. The fossil fuel industry knew decades ago that this is what their pollution was causing, so they
spent billions to lie to the public and block climate action.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEuL9UE3sJ01zwJv6dCRq4VgaaqhwFAmPNYrAACgkQCRq4Vgaa qhwWqw/+Ovx1DrPChTSMyEq+2Q4eP2Vjcs+Re0zVTgYMexd+v8p89/cmZbpKyDqT j7dO3NrVsBEnU9TM755ixPXahxmNmrs5Nw74dlOfoPVS8Hct2b5KpUnJ+UQ9Vk77 2lSfCG3Nm3JtTd3QeuHABfhd4cjaz7mezZAKScoehn+4gkqmx+j4o5EguYoMhBxe 5bqRp6sm4G0jA1bLmpgn70aW7KGOv9g/BLK/eql9KyUp5Ut9wxWrHjNvZ0Ihkf1j S7SKqPI64+I+vgPBuogkrgr022XRzyPjD/8Lx+7jBAZa6vJVe/a40SJxO1EhTl97 CJEibBfioaB/IEHBXbjNGieHeVuVrMTVTaCkJERtRkpaF0ZK9UyIZME7efktbD4Z bKI8GbR/iNk57IKCcUkhcs78WJZo/O4kVAilO89ZCwpMeRFLtfWvYEuFKjColgrE CkRShprbT5lP1qo0QN3U354RaheuS

Justin B Rye <justin.byam.rye@gmail.com> (2023-01-22):

tldr: looks good to me.

[ + Holger's green light in the other mail. ]

Thanks to both of you!

I've managed to confirm patched apt-setup udebs alongside patched
hw-detect udebs give the desired results, so I've just uploaded
apt-setup.


Cheers,
--
Cyril Brulebois (kibi@debian.org) <https://debamax.com/>
D-I release manager -- Release team member -- Freelance Consultant

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEtg6/KYRFPHDXTPR4/5FK8MKzVSAFAmPN9YkACgkQ/5FK8MKz VSDEuQ/9ESDjYPZvQjzuiX4PcZ5fGPRKfuMJ0AKs4Tl12wIC4Y93aC9kbLX0g0V9 fQFQ2ECPla/0TDtDiJWTL5srGCxVRRAFTzzoovhnHP3dt/wFvzG31BLlDpmwX1m2 qs8flwTCkwSLK31P6jiWmHEYeH/xPGktu0gUzR60XpjexN8OO9IE7cXpydWtB6m9 ShAJrcik4Q4dzb59VXZxgOPKkVEJXD3CSiN3joJT0b6DYsa4hz2voUvcC5Px7LF6 SgTqYW8scbQ0nHc3LjO5Odm9s4rOM+Y9NSGaVqmPpTECCmHTljQ4N9YxQXANZFq0 57ZCv/EUoQOzAs9XEudB7TWNxb8hb6tE2ZENhTjWm6eGrfFjmKCU+yMy0LBrFVrM 5aqwrY0YMW+dxr9iLi6D2qpHlDYrHDMxlZgla9zBy89tqlQuGDiu1Kb7yfIchpEi Vhu1t5+snRd1W8uqN8X6lkj1VJiB4hGX6Ln1pE+/Ymo7mt+vAIg5XGYm57L4Biuk qnPDORiUxtmwq+Ii3hThy53lZiZqQZRc9qd+EqgzC8LFghHJZQZeRLWShvD6tbGd fEj6O1RnQcNd7niowW1ek6RV5CButi94P5ecxxgxy41fR8fXhWAyllNFlE1trW87 W1/lEmarrY4g+Wnok9bYOXSXOQzY87JA25qk7lRwUgrQ9/muCaY=
=aW7B
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
*

Cyril Brulebois <kibi@debian.org> writes:

Template: apt-setup/contrib
Type: boolean
Default: false
# :sl1:
_Description: Use contrib software?
Some additional software has been made to work with Debian.

I read this (and especially "has been made to work") as saying this is
about software that has been specifically designed for debian. im not
sure that is what you intend - isnt contrib merely any software that is
free but depends on non-free software?

Though this
software is free, it depends on non-free software for its operation. This
software is not a part of Debian, but standard Debian tools can be
used to install it.
.

"a part" -> "part"
i found "standard debian tools" a bit cryptic - if standard tools can be
used, what is then need for this question? maybe "if you choose this
option" is needed somewhere?

(you might consider ""usual" instead of "standard"" to avoid
confusion with priority of packages and because there is apt and
aptitude and other choices available. or has debian really standardised
on one - if so would be better to say "using apt")

i also think "this software is free" will be read by many as meaning you
dont pay money for it. would "freely licensed" be better?

Please choose whether you want this software to be made available to you.

this sounds like you are asking me to actually install the software, as opposed to enabling me to install it later... but probably ok

Template: apt-setup/non-free
Type: boolean
Default: false
# :sl1:
_Description: Use non-free software?
Some non-free software has been made to work with Debian. Though this
software is not at all a part of Debian, standard Debian tools
can be used

As above, plus "not at all a part" -> "not part".

to install it. This software has varying licenses which may
prevent you

"varying" sounds odd to me, suggests a single license chsnges over
time(?).
i wonder if it that word should be deleted

from using, modifying, or sharing it.
.
Please choose whether you want to have it available anyway.

Therefore I've drafted the following for apt-setup/non-free-firmware:

Template: apt-setup/non-free-firmware
Type: boolean
Default: false
# :sl5:
_Description: Use non-free firmware?
Some non-free firmware has been made to work with Debian. Though this
firmware is not at all a part of Debian, standard Debian tools can be used
to install it. This firmware has varying licenses which may prevent you
from using, modifying, or sharing it.
.
Please choose whether you want to have it available anyway.

Same comments as above. I suppose there is no contrib-firmware (yet?)?

Differences:
- non-free → non-free-firmware
- software → firmware
- :sl1: → :sl5:

I don't think we need to go into more details about why there are
different components, why non-free-firmware was split out of non-free,
etc. After all, those questions are only asked in expert mode, and
I'd hope expert users to have heard about our move to supporting this
new non-free-firmware component… Hopefully we'll have some release notes about it, possibly installation guide updates, etc.

I agree you dont want any of that stuff here. I do think it would help new users,
even "experts" to say that 'firmware is used to enable support for
hardware' (is that right?) somewhere

I've selected sublevel 5 instead of sublevel 1, to make sure this isn't
going to hurt the translation status (which localechooser uses to warn against incomplete translations at the very beginning of the
installation process). Since that template is only shown in expert mode,
and since we're adding /pretty late/ in the release cycle, I'd be happy
to have translations if translators jump on it, and “sed” the non-free
on into non-free-firmware, but we shouldn't block on this… I'll let
Holger comment about that part and possibly propose different plans.

(i didnt understand any of that paragraph, but i would hope the firmware question is shown to at least as many people as the non-free question,
since far more people would want to enable it - eg you migth want to do firmware question before the more general 'software' one)

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Justin B Rye <justin.byam.rye@gmail.com> writes:

Cyril Brulebois wrote:

...

_Description: Use non-free firmware?
Some non-free firmware has been made to work with Debian. Though this

The phrasing "made to work with" has always struck me as poor, since
there are two obvious misinterpretations - "created in order to work
on" or "forced to work on" Debian. All we mean is things are
organised so that it's made *available* for use on Debian. But is
there a better short way of saying that? At any rate I don't think
it's worth slowing down this update.

How about "packaged alongside"?

Some non-free firmware has been packaged alongside Debian. Though this

firmware is not at all a part of Debian, standard Debian tools can be used
to install it. This firmware has varying licenses which may prevent you >> from using, modifying, or sharing it.
.
Please choose whether you want to have it available anyway.

which also ought to work for the contrib case.

Cheers, Phil.
--
|)| Philip Hands [+44 (0)20 8530 9560] HANDS.COM Ltd.
|-| http://www.hands.com/ http://ftp.uk.debian.org/
|(| Hugo-Klemm-Strasse 34, 21075 Hamburg, GERMANY

--=-=-Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEE3/FBWs4yJ/zyBwfW0EujoAEl1cAFAmPPl28ACgkQ0EujoAEl 1cBKnw//U2lp3dMt0lLWa2LHN6FX66Ew5B9MtpYbDMruik4JFWTTqOHh4Y2Mw0I4 fesm9huoi/4kPgeODALQd5JUTjEby+jrg8h1L/3dH/W8nlv8/4XRib7tESpGPcAg 3+o6D47fw0eSwQSx9etAdKqLYHEcfXTh2t12mZOSebtj98SKNBe0J+mc+W0ZSVLH HY/0er6rF/Pq/NZnuuEIcDU9Tf3z3X6GoMTbC8/c+sPAKQr0Ime0GASIqTlW0rsN 44CbiZ8NP9wOc8q1bxy+fhzz35QZanVJmdo2ZAQvMPRC+72D1AOcn08bORUfm7r3 o8TRKh6gXv2EvjvBgSoTIRokhz1l0wU9JrWMQuxB+/rQKRKmYnL+nVQdW+QMZzp7 RAues/t6QTqbQzrj4fXGamj4bheelWskogRM9C9i76ZD7DSVQQkHgFOUPUkD9yPS Ph1iZdhVJIWwmAbn64VmHB8EanOavAzgzsD3CtXodNo4AsnhIYFf2d+lppSSOsgI pSVK7cfeShlWUJBcRLl5BbkhEGC0P7Up/8/zWav53SBPsW5/zniViasr94V5JiwI xKoOoBZQr1pEXhkiQL+DNhBx/JNR5FTY7jFi9RTTKMlER+jtGsJKBNuKo7wff+TV kLkdxBesLRr1YtM

Philip Hands wrote:

_Description: Use non-free firmware?
Some non-free firmware has been made to work with Debian. Though this >>

The phrasing "made to work with" has always struck me as poor, since
there are two obvious misinterpretations - "created in order to work
on" or "forced to work on" Debian. All we mean is things are
organised so that it's made *available* for use on Debian. But is
there a better short way of saying that? At any rate I don't think
it's worth slowing down this update.

How about "packaged alongside"?

Some non-free firmware has been packaged alongside Debian. Though this
[...]

That's is a more straightforward way of saying it if our audience is
already familiar with all the terminology of developers "packaging"
software for distributions, but the existing phrasing seems to be
going to some lengths to avoid that jargon. If we're going to change
that then the whole thing would need to be rethought.
--
JBR with qualifications in linguistics, experience as a Debian
sysadmin, and probably no clue about this particular package

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Hi,

Just following up on that bit for information:

Holger Wansing <hwansing@mailbox.org> (2023-01-22):

Cyril Brulebois <kibi@debian.org> wrote (Sun, 22 Jan 2023 16:24:12 +0100):

I've selected sublevel 5 instead of sublevel 1, to make sure this isn't going to hurt the translation status (which localechooser uses to warn against incomplete translations at the very beginning of the
installation process). Since that template is only shown in expert mode, and since we're adding /pretty late/ in the release cycle, I'd be happy
to have translations if translators jump on it, and “sed” the non-free on into non-free-firmware, but we shouldn't block on this… I'll let Holger comment about that part and possibly propose different plans.

+1

Nothing more to add here from my side
Good work

Despite this attempt, this invalidated a lot of languages, dropping from
Full to Most. Indeed, that means 2 strings (short and long descriptions)
that are fuzzy (rather than entirely untranslated, since the non-free
ones they were copied from are so close).

Since those questions are never asked directly during a normal install,
I've decided to fudge the numbers by moving stats/apt-setup.5 out of the
way before the per-language computations:
https://salsa.debian.org/installer-team/debian-installer/-/commit/9d49564a91a48f87ae02026d9176d10eabd7142e

This moves numbers up from 15 languages fully translated to 40.

While this is a little lie, it seems to me it represents reality a
little better than actual raw numbers.


Cheers,
--
Cyril Brulebois (kibi@debian.org) <https://debamax.com/>
D-I release manager -- Release team member -- Freelance Consultant

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEtg6/KYRFPHDXTPR4/5FK8MKzVSAFAmPvd70ACgkQ/5FK8MKz VSAn+w/+ILwxpFytMhOmcjWACVXBt3FStVVIKmTdB0lsuPJRiPIOYYRmVEoCWbbA YR24PqOWIpf8fu1crNE+FHyz2jspRL/yVAqe4jFchqcNfrYyRG8YImA8kOHB9LsL hx3cMRLBMzrBmD8w8YMFLFiLwEfErn6RAwUlILliRiSVSz5kUq7+b3UHUZFlcMje 0sLLCyEZCmfXnufx2Byn9ZeL2NCb5glIp5yeZS596yuanEUof1K+ricwL4eYKhbF QsEb5ZEXgp/kBzCfHMnOv+wbSjyH0eom1vlFJzh4zp1dOkSrBn/sE2H+G0ABoxES 8BjYcj0P4fS+LPtf1hy0oavn/Lsk1081e2ZPnTVEp3ccWRZZWGEGlmwdlkPa8Lnz lt6EW2q0OX71oBmF62EzXeYw3OES/mPKDNBoVc9XzUc9uvV3lAC1sFXGtDlyJ9zJ Oy0PM/P+AaYpDJliHjkygzJYc7tLlzS0DwMYBLxUY/tjL7CeQD8K1qVBrm+GpHey 3a+IneGCZziJ0VU8tTFV5nXkVMfjXTJH56rM5JfTl6XJR/7gY7U3X2qZfgKpnB3Z TRAAov815T/i65gpnbBPWTs/UyRd1ldHRGSC2suyb8JhZPMZcI7BVBpA/Wlvhwdn H4no8BCo3K8ygWfaQ6Mler8lnPKIKMehtod2UESrBWc8BrOc9dg=
=vQw2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
*