Request: Completely free OS

[diligentcircle]

Hi,


Although the systems available on the OS are mostly free software, some nonfree software exists. There is nonfree firmware for the WiFi and GPU, and a nonfree driver for the GPU. Although this probably does not bother many people, it does bother me.


In addition, the default OS offers PNDStore by default, and suggests PNDManager, both of which search the Repo, which has a lot of nonfree software. This is something I can personally work around, but this suggstion of nonfree software turns me off from recommending this device to other people.


So, I have a request, though it might be kind of big: any 100% free software OS, i.e. one that follows the GNU Project's guidelines for free distributions:


http://www.gnu.org/d...guidelines.html


It can be either a port of an existing free OS or a modification of an OS that already runs on the Pandora, as long as the GNU Project's guidelines are followed, so pick whatever is easiest. I don't know how big of a job it is, to be honest. I am strongly considering offering a bounty for this (I'm thinking $50), because it is very important to me.


Some notes:

• The system can run either on NAND (replacing the default OS) or an SD card, but if it runs on the NAND, there needs to be an easy way to get PNDs that are free software without seeing nonfree ones (otherwise, the system would be very incomplete for a GNU/Linux system). This can mean modifying PNDStore and/or PNDManager to only show free software (interpreting no license as being nonfree), or it can mean maintaining a separate repo.
  
• Such an OS will not support the on-board WiFi or 3D, and this is fine. Do not try to "solve" the problem by adding the nonfree software back in.
  
• Support for the nubs as mouse controls is needed, since the touchscreen alone can never be perfect for the mouse.
  
• The default keyboard layout needs to be the layout needed for the Pandora's keyboard.
  
• PND support would be great, but it is not mandatory as long as there is a good (up-to-date) repo.
  

Anyone mildly interested in doing this? Any thoughts, comments, insanity charges, etc are also welcome.

 

[_wb_]

Wouldn't it be enough to remove the nonfree kernel modules from SuperZaxxon and add a feature to PNDManager to not show the nonfree repo entries?

 

[Linux-SWAT]

I don't know how big of a job it is, to be honest. I am strongly considering offering a bounty for this (I'm thinking $50)

^^ You just can't imagine the time i've spent on my Slack port . Hopefully i now have a build system that can be used to port other distros.


I also support your idea, but the audience will be too small for a complete feature-lacking distro...

 

[diligentcircle]

Wouldn't it be enough to remove the nonfree kernel modules from SuperZaxxon and add a feature to PNDManager to not show the nonfree repo entries?

Yes, it would. Also, either modify PNDStore the same way or don't include it. That's one of the options I mentioned, though you explained it differently.


Come to think of it, such a modification wouldn't be too difficult if various forms of common free software licenses were searched for in the licenses (and no license interpreted as nonfree), and it would even give a very good reason for devs to actually specify a license there.

 

[mcobit]

I think linuxswat could easily build slackware without any non-free stuff, when he builds a custom kernel.


But what about the nub-firmware? That is not open source either, even if its just a programmed microcontroller.


So if you want to go with free software only, maybe you have to abandon nubsupport, too.

 

[F_Slim]

Isn't the NUB-firmware non-free, too?


EDIT: h34r: by mcobit

 

[_wb_]

I think even RMS is OK with programmed microcontrollers iirc. So I don't think the nubs would be an issue.


Is it needed to build a new kernel or can you just remove some modules and use the default SZ kernel?

 

[diligentcircle]

Like _wb_ said, the nubs are fine. The firmware is isolated to the nubs and never changes, so it might as well be a circuit.

 

[mcobit]

But you cannot change the graphicsdrivers binaryblob and it cannot be used with anything else then the sgx, so what makes that special?


That it is not on a microcontroller, but on the nand?


Sorry, but sometimes I don't understand you free-software guys


Edit: Would it be ok, if the binaryblob for the sgx came with the chip on some flash memory, that would be included on the chip?

 

[TrashyMG]

Sorry, but sometimes I don't understand you free-software guys

It's kind of like Vegans, I just don't understand how you can't eat that cute animal over there..


It's a life style choice you just got to accept even if you can't understand it.

 

[Exophase]

Edit: Would it be ok, if the binaryblob for the sgx came with the chip on some flash memory, that would be included on the chip?

The distinction (or at least as I understand it) is in whether or not you can modify it. You can replace the SGX driver and firmware blob with an update from IMG, you can hack modifications, etc. The nub firmware can only be modified by soldering a programming port onto the Pandora's PCB and hooking it up with a programmer. This may actually be a gray area since it's not fully immutable, but there's still a distinction that you can't do it entirely in software (FSF could extend the "may as well be a circuit" analogy to treat this as equivalent to modifying a circuit).


So to your answer your question, it'd only be comparable if you can't modify the SGX's flash via a software interface to the SGX.


Interestingly RPi has been facing the same issue.. they've been fishing around putting their core video driver software on a ROM (probably something makeshift like NAND with programming fuses blown) instead of on the main storage just to get FSF approval. I can't really read it as anything other than this - if I can't modify something then no one should be able to. It's all or nothing, with nothing being perfectly acceptable. For instance AFAIK FSF finds it unethical to deny companies the right to develop software for private distribution only.

 

[notaz]

Just run:

sudo su

opkg remove libgles-omap3

rm /lib/firmware/wl1251-fw.bin

And optionally

opkg remove pandora-pndstore

And there you have your free OS.

 

[diligentcircle]

Exophase hit the nail on the head.


EDIT: That sounds cool, Notaz. If that removes all nonfree software (I assume so), all that's needed is a modified version of PNDManager that only shows free software (and should also hide certain free packages, esp. PNDStore and PNDManager, that suggest nonfree software). Anyone up for that?


After that, all that would be needed is for this completely free version of the OS, with no access to the nonfree software in any repo, mind you, to be available as a download, or better yet, offered on new units, so that I can actually recommend the Pandora.


Still, a completely free SD-based disro would be nice, since having a regular package manager is a nice thing to have.

 

[mcobit]

Thanks for the explaination Exo, still I think this is a bit funny.

 

[Exophase]

After that, all that would be needed is for this completely free version of the OS, with no access to the nonfree software in any repo, mind you, to be available as a download, or better yet, offered on new units, so that I can actually recommend the Pandora.

Please help me understand the motivation behind this.. People should be able to see for themselves if something on the repo is free or not, or at least they'd be able to determine as well as software would be able to. I don't think a free distro needs to extend responsibility to disallowing the user from installing non-free stuff on their own. Is this just a matter of convenience, or is this too going to be an issue for FSF endorsement?

 

[_wb_]

I'd rather have something that doesn't show the non-free stuff by default, but you can still use it to install non-free stuff if you really want to. Just make the distinction really clear - not like it is now, where everything is shown mixed together and it is quite hard to check what is free and what is non-free.

 

[mcobit]

Is this a battle about making the Pandora FSF compatible by default?


Imho I could live with showing everything by default and the possibility to filter for free software and proprietary software.


Of course there are some licenses in between.


Also the licensetag is just text right now, so how to filter that if everybody can write there what he wants?


You would have to add a free software tag with true or false to the pxmlspec for that to work.


Edit: to make it clear, I am not against a free software system alternative. You might want to contact BZaR if he wants to modify PNDManager to be included into it and just show free software.

 

[Exophase]

Is this a battle about making the Pandora FSF compatible by default?

Only as a shipment option at most.

Of course there are some licenses in between.

Not as far as FSF is concerned. They give very rigid criteria for whether or not something is "free" by their definition (including a long list of licenses that are or aren't.. mostly aren't)

 

[Wrath Of Khan]

??????????

 

[_wb_]

A free software tag in the PXML is the cleanest solution, but it requires all PNDs to be modified.


Just grepping the license field for strings like "GPL", "MIT", "BSD" etc. should work well enough.