Does Patrick and Co. care about the separation of nonfree/free software in the distro? According to freeslack website, the kernel includes nonfree binaries and there are things like chrome and java in the repository in the extra folder (although they seem to be only slackbuilds and do not actually contain binaries...that does not bother me). Why couldn't they have just separated it into the extra or create a nonfree repository?

(Why I am asking this/if you care to read)
Still deciding what distro to replace my current CentOS server (some security updates take too long to get patched in, such as the recent openssl vulnerabilities which were 6 days late,also because it includes nonfree binary blobs in the kernel, and I kind of want to try something else). I like the idea of free software and will try and run only free software wherever I can (desktop is impossible for me at this point, but server is perfectly viable, abliet I will still be running things like minecraft and other game servers from time to time). I like Slackware's philosophy (I would just feel happier running Slackware than Debian for some reason, I am getting really attached to these things for some reason) and I like Debian's philosophy also of creating a free OS.

I suggest that you give Slackware a try and see if you like it. I really appreciate that I can have a full install of Slackware done in 10 minutes and be up and running with my desktop environment of choice. I like Debian and a lot of other operating systems. Slackware is my favorite distribution.

I assume you're confused because you haven't done a Slackware install yet. When you do a full Slackware install, software included in its extra folder (such as Chrome and Java) is not installed. The software in that folder is there for you to choose to add afterwards.

As for the kernel, Slackware's build is of an unpatched kernel from kernel.org.

It sounds like Slackware+FreeSlack should fit your needs.

I didn't know about the extra not being installed (although I was okay with anyway as seems mostly just slack builds). I have installed Slackware in a VM but I've only messed around with it for a very short time.

I also forgot about part of Slackware philosophy is to change as little of upstream as possible right? Changing the kernel to not include nonfree parts would be a pretty big change... (why doesn't Linus have a free and non free version?). Hmm, I will give both out an in-depth try. I really do like both a lot, if I go with Debian I learn how Debian configs it's things (like the, if you know redhat then you know redhat) if I go with Slackware than I will know Linux, although most distros change the configurations from upstream very noticeably so there's really no difference I guess.

ATM, I can't get something as simple as https working on Slackware lol (not blaming the software obv. as I havent had much time) I also don't know how certain things will work without PAM. Will see though.

Extra contains some slackbuilds and some packages. I assume the slackbuilds cover the non-redistributable stuff.

~d

There are a few projects out there that can add PAM to the system if so desired.

But with free/nonfree, I think Pat and team are aiming to give users a good out-of-box experience. They do include some items that are non-free, but they help to provide that better experience. The firmware section of the kernel allows many opensource drivers to use hardware. There are a LOT of wireless devices out there that won't work without firmware as well as most (if not all) Radeon hardware.

It may be a turn-off for those who want a completely free distro (which I'd suspect is a minority compared to the people who are willing to install binaries on the system), but I'm sure Pat made the decision knowing full well what some users might think about it. Luckily, for those users who want a truly free Slackware, freeslack is there to help them get it truly free.

Also, Security Updates aren't always as timely as some would like, but it is usually easy enough to create your own packages with the newer releases from upstream. Most of the time, it's just a matter of changing the version on the SlackBuild.

The free versus non-free software argument is a moot point if it means you have an out-of-the-box fully working and supportive release. Not every distribution needs to comply with Stallman's idealisms. Then again not all of us can afford System76 PCs either.

Indeed! I appreciate the fact that Slackware works out of the box on all 5 of my units. Slackware accurately identifies/supports all of my hardware flawlessly.

Wait, I thought that basically all that you needed to do to have a kernel without any binary blobs on stock slackware is skip the kernel-firmware package. Am I mistaken? I know that there's more to having a fully "free according to the FSF" distro, but I thought generally Slackware was pretty close to being compliant.

It seems that some folks like to beat dead horses.

However, a quick internet search would have provided all needed answers and spared us yet another thread on that topic. And also would have easily leaded to the complete list of the packages considered "non free" by the FSF in Slackware version 14.1.

I suggest that we move on.

4 members found this post helpful.

The 'blob' argument may need some clarification. The microcode/firmware included in the Linux kernel is loaded onto the device itself and is required for the device to function. It's all freely redistributable - otherwise it would not be included in any given kernel release (e.g. some broadcom firmware, etc). In FSF/Stallmanist speak this is a 'blob'.

If it wasn't loaded in this manner, it might be that firmware is already on the device - as well as on other devices on your system (in fact it is).

In everyone-else-speak a 'blob' is something like the nvidia proprietary driver kernel module. This actually gets loaded into the kernel. Device firmware/microcode does not get loaded into the kernel.

Having the firmware installed is not an issue. The way to look at this logically:

Problem: You have a device which requires firmware. Do you want to use the device?

No: Remove it and replace with a device which does not require that firmware be loaded from user space.

Yes: Use the device (firmware will be loaded if available).

Nuking /lib/firmware doesn't even come into it.

The Debian stance on this is just silly and wasn't always the case.

2 members found this post helpful.

I cannot speak for Patrick V. and the rest of the core dev team, but my objective perception is that they care about free software about as much as Linus T. To this day, the only closed-source parts of Slackware base install are the kernel firmwares. The rest of the non-free bits are either open-source or in extra (so never get installed). This overall attitude is good enough to keep most of the dangers of non-free software away, but it does not seem to be based on ethics, not consistent or airtight (doesn't even try to be), and IMHO prone to erosion with time, unless some other considerations come into play.

FreeSlack development has been stagnant lately, but it won't be forever. Our stable x64 repo works great, and we are fairly close to having a single working scripty that deblobs the official repository. So fairly soon (within your lifetime) we expect to add support for -current as well keep extending it to the future releases. We are also confident we can make free installation media, as well as allow users to use our repo right after booting from the non-free stock media. Once these easy tasks are complete, we will be certifiable by FSF, even though that was never our goal. I discussed this with Richard S., and he saw no problem certifying a "flavor" of an otherwise non-free distro, as long as the flavor uses its own software channel (which we do already) and has clear guidelines as to what constitutes non-free software and what to do with it.

To sum up, Slackware is more than just the core dev team. Many distro-keeping tasks are being outsourced to the community: where would Slackware be without slackbuilds or alien's binaries, for example? In the same vein FreeSlack is a community effort to provide a pure free flavor of the stock. It doesn't matter much if Patrick V. cares about software freedom; what matters is that FreeSlack devs care about it about as much as FSF itself

Praise "Bob"

3 members found this post helpful.

I see that if I blacklist xgames slackware will be a little more free

Ask yourself this.

Do you want a system that works out of the box, or a system that requires extra work? By including firmware, Slackware aims to support a wider range of hardware, plus the fact that Slackware comes all inclusive rather that net installed like Debian makes a huge difference.

Most hardware requires non-free firmware, but do we really need the source code to this firmware to have a working system? It's microcode that is loaded onto the hardware and only activates it's low level functions, and vendors supply it. AMD, Intel, Nvidia, and others all on some level require firmware to be available.

Only a handful of systems and vendors use hardware that doesn't require firmware.

Well My computer is My hardware I am free to choose the tools that run on my computer the host blob is Slackware. the host kernel is linux. I am sure The slackware team thinks stable tools for the work it does.