[littlestymaar]

Debian used not to work easily on hardware that require proprietary drivers, did it change recently ?

I left Ubuntu almost ten years ago, after 5 years of using it, when they started using MIR instead of Gnome2 and I replaced it with Linux Mint and I haven't looked back. This whole snap thing looks like the new weird decision made by Canonical to make their faithful users leave :/

[jasonjayr]

Debian runs on everything I've come in contact with, or virtualized.

Debian's problem is that it's stodgy updating policy means 'Stable' is still on 4.19, things like Wireguard require a simple, but odd procedure to request apt pull packages from newer releases, and most of the copy/pasteable examples out there assume Ubuntu, and their versions/customization to critical infrastructure packages.

IMHO, the stodgy updates make it a perfect candidate for server based software. Personally, my Debian know-how makes it great for my desktop, and It has not failed for my use case: Development, Sysadmin, Browsers, Steam (or any other games releasing linux versions)

[zozbot234]

> things like Wireguard require a simple, but odd procedure to request apt pull packages from newer releases

That's not a good idea, as it breaks the assurance that Debian Stable provides. Using the backports repository is the recommended approach if you need a newer version of some clearly-defined piece of software. It will pull the newer dependencies it requires from backports, while still relying on stock-provided packages as far as practicable.

[catalogia]

It's not a good idea, but Debian's wiki is nevertheless recommending it: https://wiki.debian.org/WireGuard

I tried it. Long story short, now I'm on Sid.

[XelNika]

The Wiki instructions are outdated and WireGuard has since (March 2020) come to buster-backports.

[ncmncm]

It has been decades since I had to provide extra drivers to a Debian install.

It is true that the first-presented installer ISO images on Debian's downloads page lack the worst proprietary drivers, but another couple of clicks takes you to images with them included. So, worst case, you find that the image you have lacks such a needed driver, and you use another image. In practice, I just start with the latter, and have not encountered hardware not covered. For the absolute newest equipment, a "testing" installer may be the right version to use.

The Debian download pages provide installer images for all needs. I have not needed to look at secondary sites, which also exist for specialized needs.

[Firehawke]

If you have proprietary drivers, you'll need to prepare a USB stick with them downloaded onto it. They won't be on the installer image.

On my older 2011-era laptop, that's the wifi and wired network that need those drivers. It's a bit of a pain.

[diffeomorphism]

> you'll need to prepare a USB stick with them downloaded onto it

Not really. Debian also offers one with all the firmware included but explicitly labels it "unofficial" (though very much official in practice and hosted on debian servers). The "pain" is thus literally to click on another download link.

[pnako]

Generally it's not the drivers but the firmware for those devices, i.e. code that runs inside the device.

I think it's an over-zealous position from Debian not to redistribute firmware. Even systems that are very strict about licensing, like OpenBSD, redistribute firmware, because they have some common sense.

[Jedd]

> I think it's an over-zealous position from Debian not to redistribute firmware. Even systems that are very strict about licensing, like OpenBSD, redistribute firmware, because they have some common sense.

OTOH I believe it's a position fully aligned with their ethical standpoint. Equating common sense with your personal preference isn't very gracious.

If you want something that's less zealous about respecting (and eschewing) stupid licensing, but is more zealous about randomly upgrading all your software packages unexpectedly, there's always Ubuntu.

[pnako]

I don't see how it aligns with their ethical standpoint. Firmware is just a blob you load into the device. The alternative is to have it already burned into ROM.

What exactly do you achieve by refusing to load it? Are you more free in one case and not the other?

[Jedd]

If you feel it could be better documented than:

https://wiki.debian.org/Firmware

you could perhaps offer to update that page to remove the ambiguities you believe exist.

[pnako]

That page does not really offer any explanation.

For all intents and purposes, firmware is like a key or a password you must supply to the device to make it work. The driver, which is indeed open-source, just says: "here, device, is the firmware you need". That's it. You are not achieving anything useful at all by making people go through some ceremony to download it separately. Maybe they just want to send the signal that people should buy devices where the firmware is already burned into ROM or ASIC or whatever?

[ncmncm]

Debian does, in fact, distribute firmware. They are just careful to ensure that you are getting it deliberately, and not accidentally.

[pnako]

Yeah they should do that with the libc, keyboard drivers, etc. as well.

[Nursie]

Nvidia has been easy on debian for quite some time now, are there other proprietary drivers that are important?