On Sat 19 Nov 2016 at 12:30:47 -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > On Fri, 18 Nov 2016, Jape Person wrote: > > What about hplip? Doesn't inclusion of the hp-setup program in hplip sort of > > violate the spirit of having only FOSS in the main repository when executing > > No, it doesn't violate the spirit. HPLIP is FLOSS, including the > hp-setup program itself. The binary blob is minor funcionality as far > as HPLIP usage is concerned (although it isn't minor functionality for > the unfortunate onwers of the subset of HP devices that require the > binary blob to work). > > Now, if HPLIP was composed only of the hp-setup program, *and* hp-setup > was only good for downloading/interfacing to the binary blob in the > first place (as far as I recall, it does more than that), it would be > "contrib" material (instead of Debian main material).
hp-plugin's sole purpose is to download and install the plugin but, by the same argument, it still doesn't make hplip a candidate for contrib. > That is not true, however. So, HPLIP belongs in Debian main. A package > in main cannot build packages for contrib or non-free (and vice-versa), > and it doesn't make sense to duplicate the entire HPLIP *source* package > just to have a neutered-by-patching hp-setup utility in main, and a > complete one in contrib. > > > it will result in installation of a proprietary blob? I just ran it as a > > Well, Debian is not in the business of neutering software to remove > support for binary blobs[1]. There are Linux distros that cather for > that market, though, such as Linux-Libre. > > [1] We don't distribute such blobs in Debian main, but software in main > may make use of such blobs when available -- such as the Linux kernel. > And while the blobs would go in non-free if their license permits that > much, the software that downloads or uses it may go in contrib, non-free > or even Debian main, depending a _lot_ on the specific details. > > > I've been pretty ill and not paying careful attention to the list for a long > > time now. has this already been discussed? If so, didn't find any pertinent > > threads. > > Yes, it was. Somewhat recently, too. I don't recall the thread, > though. It was sub-thread of another thread. Starts here: https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2016/10/msg01016.html > > This seems to be a step backward in HP's technical support for open source > > software. I'm disappointed. > > HP's printer division is nowadays very different from the one you might > know from a decade ago. You might want to inform yourself better about > their recent attempts at ink cartridge lockdown, for example. > > Basically, if an HP printer is not a high-end model that has a > software-driver-less network port that can take PDF/1A directly using > the IPP protocol natively, I wouldn't recommend it. If it does, I'd > still recommend that you get yourself informed about its operational > costs (ink/toner, replacement fusers and periodic maintenance kit) first > -- but that is valid for any printer vendor. > > > So, does anyone know of a laser MFP (or a separate laser printer and > > scanner) which I can hook up to my network (preferably wirelessly) and use > > in Debian testing without violating my planned avoidance of proprietary > > software and drivers? > > I'd like to know that, too. I need a new home color printer, my > 10-year-old HP PhotoSmart (blobless) MFP has finally broken down and > good second-hand parts are not easy to find in Brazil :-( Why is it important for the printer to be blobless? Look at it this way: A printer is choc-a-bloc full of firmware. None of this firmware is accessible to a user, even if something like an interpreter is based on an open standard such as PostScript. Indeed, there may be a rasteriser which itself uses a proprietary format such as URF. Suppose there are some bugs in the firmware; for example, the AirPrint facility ceases to work reliably with an i-device. This has happened in the past and the manufacturer provided a binary blob to fix it. What would you do? Ok, I'll tell you what I would do. I would get the blob and upload it to the printer to bring it back to a working state. I would do the same for a troublesome PDF rasteriser. I see no difference between doing that and getting an hplip plugin to have the printer (or scanner) working at its full potential. -- Brian.