Linux wifi help :(

From:	Peter (BOUGHTONP)	2 Feb 2017 15:21
To:	ANT_THOMAS	11 of 19

41880.11 In reply to 41880.5

Half do, half don't object, and the point is identical bases.

I'm building the most free solution without sacrificing user friendliness whilst being constrained by time - if I'd discovered this sooner I probably would have looked for a different LTS distro that used the regular kernel, and it seems likely I'm going to have to waste the entire evening tonight repeating stuff I've already done. :(

3.1415P265E589T932E846R64338

0/0

Reply Quote

More

From:	ANT_THOMAS	3 Feb 2017 09:33
To:	Peter (BOUGHTONP)	12 of 19

41880.12 In reply to 41880.11
I guess that's the penalty you pay for not checking all hardware is compatible with the strict list. Are you able to use a regular kernel? Or does that just defeat the whole object and you may as well start from scratch with a well supported distro? A

0/0

Reply Quote

More

From:	Peter (BOUGHTONP)	3 Feb 2017 11:36
To:	ANT_THOMAS	13 of 19

41880.13 In reply to 41880.12

I did check the hardware, and it was listed as Linux compatible, with no indication on wireless firmware being an issue. Whilst looking into Trisquel I either didn't see or didn't notice that all the people there using and recommending Thinkpads didn't use the default wireless card.

It was only on looking more into Linux-libre that I discovered it doesn't just remove non-free firmware, but actively refuses to load it even if you install it separately.

So I'm going with Debian - still got some more setup to do today, but not oversleeping like I usually do means I at least have a bit of time.

3.1415P265E589T932E846R64338

0/0

Reply Quote

More

From:	ANT_THOMAS	3 Feb 2017 11:43
To:	Peter (BOUGHTONP)	14 of 19

41880.14 In reply to 41880.13
That's a bit shit, freedom should include being able to install whatever you want without being restricted to what some group of people say you should/shouldn't. A

0/0

Reply Quote

More

From:	Peter (BOUGHTONP)	3 Feb 2017 12:51
To:	ANT_THOMAS	15 of 19

41880.15 In reply to 41880.14
Yep, goes against "The freedom to run the program as you wish, for any purpose" and "The freedom to ... change it so it does your computing as you wish" No point arguing that though - they'd just say having the source code means you're free to modify it, (whilst insisting immediately that doing so would be the worst thing ever). `3.1415P265E589T932E846R64338`

0/0

Reply Quote

More

From:	ANT_THOMAS	3 Feb 2017 15:11
To:	Peter (BOUGHTONP)	16 of 19

41880.16 In reply to 41880.15
I had a very quick search to see what support that distro had for Intel WiFi (obviously little or none), and the first few forum posts were just people getting angry for others linking to non-free proprietary firmwares. At which point I thought, I'm not Richard Stallman so I really don't care. A

0/0

Reply Quote

More

From:	CHYRON (DSMITHHFX)	3 Feb 2017 16:11
To:	ANT_THOMAS	17 of 19

41880.17 In reply to 41880.16
Richard cares so you don't have to. “Why I threw swastika golf balls at Donald Trump”

0/0

Reply Quote

More

From:	ANT_THOMAS	3 Feb 2017 16:38
To:	CHYRON (DSMITHHFX)	18 of 19

41880.18 In reply to 41880.17
It's a massive weight off my penguin shoulders. A

0/0

Reply Quote

More

From:	Drew (X3N0PH0N)	3 Feb 2017 19:39
To:	Peter (BOUGHTONP)	19 of 19

41880.19 In reply to 41880.15
It's the nature of the beast though innit. If you want to be 100% certain that there's nothing proprietary on your machine, then Trisquel is the right choice. Which means for the vast majority of people in the vast majority of situations, it's a terrible choice. There are plenty of other distros (Debian's a good choice for a fairly hard-line but still sane approach to freeness). , , , , , , , , , , `' (o,o) (o,o) (o,o) (o,o) (o,o) \ \|)__) \|)__) \|)__) \|)__) \|)__) ''`>-,--”-”---”-”---”-”---”-”---”-”---- ,'.*''`

0/0

Reply Quote

More