10 ms·

Trisquel GNU/Linux

72 points by disadvantage 5y ago

srvmshr 5y ago
Since it runs on Linux-libre, there is a good chance several devices/peripherals will fail to perform as intended. If the idea is to have a toy distro (working as a VM) to explore around, it’s looking great. But I don’t see why it will gain traction for real use case.
- _jal 5y ago
  Think of it as a reference implementation that, in a perfect world, hardware vendors would proudly target.
  - srvmshr 5y ago
    Hardware manufacturers can ideologically target the libre flavor, but in practice it is next to impossible to deliver. Drivers are built to address specific hardware features. As features grow, so do system complexities and software calls. Every OEM addresses a feature in a specific problem-solving paradigm. Trying to unify most hardware under a standard set of function & procedure calls cannot be fathomed. A real world analogy is to make shoes of a single size and color & expect every person in the world can use it comfortably irrespective of their size or body type.
    - yjftsjthsd-h 5y ago
      I don't follow; linux-libre still has drivers; nobody's saying you can't write per-device drivers, just that the whole of the code to run it should be FOSS.
      - srvmshr 5y ago
        I think I failed to explain the crucial part of the argument so let me try from another viewpoint: OEM like NVIDIA do not make their drivers FOSS because it makes device-specific features and improvements known. To make something work well for the device as well as FOSS, they would have to publish the software instructions specifics. That sort of things enables competition to better understand their silicon and thats exactly what they do not want. In an ideal world, libre is fine and serves all devices well. But with commercial interest in play and so many differentiation in features, it is hard to imagine libre drivers being able to cater to all device optimally
    - SahAssar 5y ago
      This distro still has drivers, it just requires those to be libre too. Every linux driver written (and also firmware/microcode) could be included, but that would require those to also be licensed as libre. It does not have any more technical restrictions, only legal and licensing ones.
- disadvantage 5y ago
  > there is a good chance several devices/peripherals will fail to perform as intended For the record, I use Trisquel and it didn't recognize my wifi adapter. I went to the forums and someone said you need special libre wifi adapters that work with Linux. However, my internal network adapter worked fine. It plays well with most ethernet adapters thankfully.
  - marcan_42 5y ago
    The vast majority of WiFi adapters work fine with Linux and linux-firmware. You only need special "libre" ("firmwareless"*) WiFi adapters if you want them to work with linux-libre and distros that use it like this one, since it cripples support for anything that requires firmware. * Most "firmwareless" devices have firmware ROMs anyway. The FSF only believe it counts as nonfree if the users can see the firmware in /lib/firmware; they are happy to endorse products with hundreds of kilobytes of nonfree firmware ROM as "respects your freedom", since users can't see the blobs.
    - not2b 5y ago
      Yes, the FSF thinks a device becomes more free if you destroy the ability to update the software that runs on it. WiFi presents a particular problem for free software because to sell a product that emits radio waves, it has to be certified (by the FCC or other national authorities), and they won't certify something that could be trivially reprogrammed to exceed legal power limitations or broadcast outside licensed frequencies. It's easiest for them if the user can't change those details at all.
- marcan_42 5y ago
  Reminder that linux-libre also removes warnings in the kernel that you're running outdated CPU microcode, because the FSF doesn't believe users should be informed about updates (some of which are security critical) to proprietary software they are already running anyway. Make of that what you will.
  - netizen-936824 5y ago
    That's a bit concerning. Has anyone written about this somewhere? I'm guessing I'm not the only one who's had their interest piqued considering the large FOSS community here
    - marcan_42 5y ago
      Last time I tried to go into more depth about this one and related policy failings of the FSF and their associated projects here, it predictably descended into a long flamewar with FSF supporters, so I'll pass on it this time. But here's a link: https://twitter.com/mjg59/status/1377402589386432512?s=20 https://twitter.com/mjg59/status/1377402589386432512?s=20
      - netizen-936824 5y ago
        Thank you! I'm a supporter of the FSF and FOSS but I also think these ideologies have to be taken in consideration with security tradeoffs and current mitigation implementations. Free software is wonderful, but we should be honest about its capability to respond to some security threats like this. I think it would be better to include such warnings, even if it included an extra 'proprietary blob' warning.
        marcan_42 5y ago
        Agreed. I'm a strong supporter of FOSS, from a pragmatic point of view of how it helps users and gives them more freedom. I do not believe ideological arguments against proprietary software should be used to make technical decisions that limit users' options or keep them uninformed, because the freedom to choose to use proprietary software is also important. Plus, the current policies of the FSF are completely inconsistent, out of touch with the reality of computing systems today, and based on arbitrary rules that end up reducing user freedom instead of increasing it (e.g. how they promote devices with firmware ROMs - which you do not have the freedom to inspect, modify, or replace with a free version - while deriding devices with firmware RAM and a blob, where you do have those freedoms).
- 7thaccount 5y ago
  I got into Trisquel briefly about a decade ago. I first noticed that YouTube wouldn't work. You could download some packages from the debian repository to get that working, but because that isn't free software, nobody would explain how. Instead they'd just lecture you on free software. I get it, but at the same time it makes your computer unusable for a lot of things. It's a hard line to tread.
theamk 5y ago
Those people are super shy about what their system is based on, which packages are available, and what is unique to Trisquel. From what I could find out, it seems to be another Ubuntu-based system, but with all non-free parts disabled. Is there anything more to it?
- marcan_42 5y ago
  That's what almost every project advertising it is free of non-free stuff is: some other project with the non-free parts removed, nothing more. Trisquel (Ubuntu), linux-libre (linux), libreboot (coreboot), etc. When your sole selling point is lack of non-free stuff, there is no need to invest time adding anything else. E.g. linux-libre is just a big script that removes the nonfree parts and firmware support; they just run it against every kernel release with minor tweaks and that's their new release. libreboot is similar.
  - crazypython 5y ago
    What about osboot, the new project by the libreboot author?
    - marcan_42 5y ago
      osboot is much more pragmatic, since it doesn't try to be 100% free of blobs but rather chooses platform support over that. AIUI it is partially a response to just how utterly useless libreboot had become (it can't support any recent platform).
- smitty1e 5y ago
  Debian/Ubuntu seems the default, but projects could be more clear. Package management is my first question.
sdfjkl 5y ago
Why Trisquel? > entirely free software > teach users to value and protect their freedom > no binary-only firmware for wireless cards or proprietary drivers for AMD/ATI and NVIDIA graphics cards are included
- gjsman-1000 5y ago
  Trisquel is an FSF project so there is absolutely nothing proprietary in it (including the kernel which is stripped of proprietary drivers). Which of course is ideologically great but makes real-world hardware support nightmarish.
- lovelyviking 5y ago
  Do they have version that doesn't mimic windows? I do understand that it is intended to take on board as many former windows users as possible but honestly some people including me are getting sick just by looking at something that even slightly reminds it ... I wish the project the best, please understand.
  - lovelyviking 5y ago
    For unreasonable downvoters let me explain that windows interface is not only aesthetically disgusting it is absolutely uncomfortable and not logically consistent therefore should be avoided as much as possible in my opinion. Familiarity is not everything. When you deal with software you kind of communicating with the imaginary one who build it. So when I am forced to use windows even for a moment I have the constant annoying impression that I am dealing with some one crazy who can through things in random places without logic or with logic that is changing from one part to another randomly. I simply can't stand it and I know there are other people who can't stand it too. And please do not think I am saying it without knowing how perfectly and logically windows is organized. I worked with it and programmed it for 10 years. It was a perfect school called "How not to do things".
  - yjftsjthsd-h 5y ago
    How are they mimicking Windows? They've got a task bar (loosely), a start button (ish), and the traditional floating windows with a title bar that has buttons on it, but beyond that I'm not seeing any real similarities? Even then: The application menu is an actual menu unlike what Windows has had since... XP? The panel has launchers and open windows, but they're separate sections unlike Windows. I guess I'm just not sure what you're seeing that so reminds you of Windows.
velcrovan 5y ago
Another Linx distro catches up to the user experience of Windows for Workgroups
- lovelyviking 5y ago
  I do understand that it is intended to take on board as many former windows users as possible but honestly I can't even look at it without pain just because it reminds this ugly windows 'style'. I would really prefer they would put something else as default.
elagost 5y ago
Trisquel is based on Ubuntu like other operating systems (Linux Mint, Pop!_OS, Zorin OS, etc.) but they do something unique - they rebuild the Ubuntu packages from source, instead of just including the Ubuntu repos in their software sources. Trisquel is quite a usable distro for laptops that are 3-4 years old if you have an appropriate wireless card - Atheros 9xxx series cards tend to work well as the ath9k driver is FOSS. That's really the only blocker most people encounter. Why run this over Debian Stable (without adding "non-free" sources) I couldn't tell you. Debian tends to be more up to date than Trisquel since it's usually based on the previous Ubuntu LTS.
- ploxiln 5y ago
  > Debian tends to be more up to date than Trisquel since it's usually based on the previous Ubuntu LTS. Agreed with most of what you wrote, except this last bit ... it's a funny way to put it :) Ubuntu is based on Debian, it "forks" from Debian "unstable" aka "sid" every 6 months (with a fair amount of additions and modifications). Debian stable is released roughly every 18 to 22 months, so it has similar age, on average, of Ubuntu LTS (uniformly every 24 months). But sometimes it's a year newer, sometimes a year older, etc.
  - brnt 5y ago
    I think they meant that Trisquels current release tends to be based on the previous Ubuntu LTS.
    - ploxiln 5y ago
      Ahhh that makes sense
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
mrtweetyhack 5y ago
einpoklum 5y ago
Trisquel's FAQ says: > Why should I use Trisquel instead of one of the better-known distributions? > There are literally hundreds of GNU/Linux distributions designed to fill every conceivable niche. Only a handful of them are entirely free software; Trisquel is one such distribution. ... but I disagree. Trisquel is based on ubuntu, and uses systemd. Not just as some optional init system you can remove - it's deeply dependent on systemd. And while systemd's license is free, may find it tends to suppress aspects of free software development by taking over and enclosing more and more system functionality. If Trisquel were to dump systemd, I would seriously consider using it. My personal choice these days is Devuan (https://devuan.org/ https://devuan.org/), the systemd-free variant of Debian., and I suggest you consider using it without the non-free components, instead of Trisquel.
- jraph 5y ago
  You are mixing concepts that are at different levels. Free software is an answer to an ethical / political issue (user rights). Systemd is an answer to a technical problem (how to manage system services, to simplify a lot). And to each their own. It's good you found something that suits you in Devuan, but it has never been easier for me to tweak my systems since systemd landed on the distributions I use. Writing a service is a breeze, including free software I wrote. Things are fast at last. It took over for reasons, and I think those reasons are technical excellence and easier maintenance burden for distributions. I'm very happy with systemd. I don't feel like it "suppresses aspects of free software development" at all.

72 points by disadvantage 5y ago

Since it runs on Linux-libre, there is a good chance several devices/peripherals will fail to perform as intended. If the idea is to have a toy distro (working as a VM) to explore around, it’s looking great. But I don’t see why it will gain traction for real use case.

_jal 5y ago
Think of it as a reference implementation that, in a perfect world, hardware vendors would proudly target.
- srvmshr 5y ago
  Hardware manufacturers can ideologically target the libre flavor, but in practice it is next to impossible to deliver. Drivers are built to address specific hardware features. As features grow, so do system complexities and software calls. Every OEM addresses a feature in a specific problem-solving paradigm. Trying to unify most hardware under a standard set of function & procedure calls cannot be fathomed. A real world analogy is to make shoes of a single size and color & expect every person in the world can use it comfortably irrespective of their size or body type.
  - yjftsjthsd-h 5y ago
    I don't follow; linux-libre still has drivers; nobody's saying you can't write per-device drivers, just that the whole of the code to run it should be FOSS.
    - srvmshr 5y ago
      I think I failed to explain the crucial part of the argument so let me try from another viewpoint: OEM like NVIDIA do not make their drivers FOSS because it makes device-specific features and improvements known. To make something work well for the device as well as FOSS, they would have to publish the software instructions specifics. That sort of things enables competition to better understand their silicon and thats exactly what they do not want. In an ideal world, libre is fine and serves all devices well. But with commercial interest in play and so many differentiation in features, it is hard to imagine libre drivers being able to cater to all device optimally
  - SahAssar 5y ago
    This distro still has drivers, it just requires those to be libre too. Every linux driver written (and also firmware/microcode) could be included, but that would require those to also be licensed as libre. It does not have any more technical restrictions, only legal and licensing ones.
disadvantage 5y ago
> there is a good chance several devices/peripherals will fail to perform as intended For the record, I use Trisquel and it didn't recognize my wifi adapter. I went to the forums and someone said you need special libre wifi adapters that work with Linux. However, my internal network adapter worked fine. It plays well with most ethernet adapters thankfully.
- marcan_42 5y ago
  The vast majority of WiFi adapters work fine with Linux and linux-firmware. You only need special "libre" ("firmwareless"*) WiFi adapters if you want them to work with linux-libre and distros that use it like this one, since it cripples support for anything that requires firmware. * Most "firmwareless" devices have firmware ROMs anyway. The FSF only believe it counts as nonfree if the users can see the firmware in /lib/firmware; they are happy to endorse products with hundreds of kilobytes of nonfree firmware ROM as "respects your freedom", since users can't see the blobs.
  - not2b 5y ago
    Yes, the FSF thinks a device becomes more free if you destroy the ability to update the software that runs on it. WiFi presents a particular problem for free software because to sell a product that emits radio waves, it has to be certified (by the FCC or other national authorities), and they won't certify something that could be trivially reprogrammed to exceed legal power limitations or broadcast outside licensed frequencies. It's easiest for them if the user can't change those details at all.
marcan_42 5y ago
Reminder that linux-libre also removes warnings in the kernel that you're running outdated CPU microcode, because the FSF doesn't believe users should be informed about updates (some of which are security critical) to proprietary software they are already running anyway. Make of that what you will.
- netizen-936824 5y ago
  That's a bit concerning. Has anyone written about this somewhere? I'm guessing I'm not the only one who's had their interest piqued considering the large FOSS community here
  - marcan_42 5y ago
    Last time I tried to go into more depth about this one and related policy failings of the FSF and their associated projects here, it predictably descended into a long flamewar with FSF supporters, so I'll pass on it this time. But here's a link: https://twitter.com/mjg59/status/1377402589386432512?s=20 https://twitter.com/mjg59/status/1377402589386432512?s=20
    - netizen-936824 5y ago
      Thank you! I'm a supporter of the FSF and FOSS but I also think these ideologies have to be taken in consideration with security tradeoffs and current mitigation implementations. Free software is wonderful, but we should be honest about its capability to respond to some security threats like this. I think it would be better to include such warnings, even if it included an extra 'proprietary blob' warning.
      - marcan_42 5y ago
        Agreed. I'm a strong supporter of FOSS, from a pragmatic point of view of how it helps users and gives them more freedom. I do not believe ideological arguments against proprietary software should be used to make technical decisions that limit users' options or keep them uninformed, because the freedom to choose to use proprietary software is also important. Plus, the current policies of the FSF are completely inconsistent, out of touch with the reality of computing systems today, and based on arbitrary rules that end up reducing user freedom instead of increasing it (e.g. how they promote devices with firmware ROMs - which you do not have the freedom to inspect, modify, or replace with a free version - while deriding devices with firmware RAM and a blob, where you do have those freedoms).
7thaccount 5y ago
I got into Trisquel briefly about a decade ago. I first noticed that YouTube wouldn't work. You could download some packages from the debian repository to get that working, but because that isn't free software, nobody would explain how. Instead they'd just lecture you on free software. I get it, but at the same time it makes your computer unusable for a lot of things. It's a hard line to tread.

theamk 5y ago

Those people are super shy about what their system is based on, which packages are available, and what is unique to Trisquel. From what I could find out, it seems to be another Ubuntu-based system, but with all non-free parts disabled. Is there anything more to it?

marcan_42 5y ago
That's what almost every project advertising it is free of non-free stuff is: some other project with the non-free parts removed, nothing more. Trisquel (Ubuntu), linux-libre (linux), libreboot (coreboot), etc. When your sole selling point is lack of non-free stuff, there is no need to invest time adding anything else. E.g. linux-libre is just a big script that removes the nonfree parts and firmware support; they just run it against every kernel release with minor tweaks and that's their new release. libreboot is similar.
- crazypython 5y ago
  What about osboot, the new project by the libreboot author?
  - marcan_42 5y ago
    osboot is much more pragmatic, since it doesn't try to be 100% free of blobs but rather chooses platform support over that. AIUI it is partially a response to just how utterly useless libreboot had become (it can't support any recent platform).
smitty1e 5y ago
Debian/Ubuntu seems the default, but projects could be more clear. Package management is my first question.

sdfjkl 5y ago

Why Trisquel? > entirely free software > teach users to value and protect their freedom > no binary-only firmware for wireless cards or proprietary drivers for AMD/ATI and NVIDIA graphics cards are included

gjsman-1000 5y ago
Trisquel is an FSF project so there is absolutely nothing proprietary in it (including the kernel which is stripped of proprietary drivers). Which of course is ideologically great but makes real-world hardware support nightmarish.
lovelyviking 5y ago
Do they have version that doesn't mimic windows? I do understand that it is intended to take on board as many former windows users as possible but honestly some people including me are getting sick just by looking at something that even slightly reminds it ... I wish the project the best, please understand.
- lovelyviking 5y ago
  For unreasonable downvoters let me explain that windows interface is not only aesthetically disgusting it is absolutely uncomfortable and not logically consistent therefore should be avoided as much as possible in my opinion. Familiarity is not everything. When you deal with software you kind of communicating with the imaginary one who build it. So when I am forced to use windows even for a moment I have the constant annoying impression that I am dealing with some one crazy who can through things in random places without logic or with logic that is changing from one part to another randomly. I simply can't stand it and I know there are other people who can't stand it too. And please do not think I am saying it without knowing how perfectly and logically windows is organized. I worked with it and programmed it for 10 years. It was a perfect school called "How not to do things".
- yjftsjthsd-h 5y ago
  How are they mimicking Windows? They've got a task bar (loosely), a start button (ish), and the traditional floating windows with a title bar that has buttons on it, but beyond that I'm not seeing any real similarities? Even then: The application menu is an actual menu unlike what Windows has had since... XP? The panel has launchers and open windows, but they're separate sections unlike Windows. I guess I'm just not sure what you're seeing that so reminds you of Windows.

velcrovan 5y ago

Another Linx distro catches up to the user experience of Windows for Workgroups

lovelyviking 5y ago
I do understand that it is intended to take on board as many former windows users as possible but honestly I can't even look at it without pain just because it reminds this ugly windows 'style'. I would really prefer they would put something else as default.

elagost 5y ago

Trisquel is based on Ubuntu like other operating systems (Linux Mint, Pop!_OS, Zorin OS, etc.) but they do something unique - they rebuild the Ubuntu packages from source, instead of just including the Ubuntu repos in their software sources. Trisquel is quite a usable distro for laptops that are 3-4 years old if you have an appropriate wireless card - Atheros 9xxx series cards tend to work well as the ath9k driver is FOSS. That's really the only blocker most people encounter. Why run this over Debian Stable (without adding "non-free" sources) I couldn't tell you. Debian tends to be more up to date than Trisquel since it's usually based on the previous Ubuntu LTS.

ploxiln 5y ago
> Debian tends to be more up to date than Trisquel since it's usually based on the previous Ubuntu LTS. Agreed with most of what you wrote, except this last bit ... it's a funny way to put it :) Ubuntu is based on Debian, it "forks" from Debian "unstable" aka "sid" every 6 months (with a fair amount of additions and modifications). Debian stable is released roughly every 18 to 22 months, so it has similar age, on average, of Ubuntu LTS (uniformly every 24 months). But sometimes it's a year newer, sometimes a year older, etc.
- brnt 5y ago
  I think they meant that Trisquels current release tends to be based on the previous Ubuntu LTS.
  - ploxiln 5y ago
    Ahhh that makes sense
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

mrtweetyhack 5y ago

einpoklum 5y ago

Trisquel's FAQ says: > Why should I use Trisquel instead of one of the better-known distributions? > There are literally hundreds of GNU/Linux distributions designed to fill every conceivable niche. Only a handful of them are entirely free software; Trisquel is one such distribution. ... but I disagree. Trisquel is based on ubuntu, and uses systemd. Not just as some optional init system you can remove - it's deeply dependent on systemd. And while systemd's license is free, may find it tends to suppress aspects of free software development by taking over and enclosing more and more system functionality. If Trisquel were to dump systemd, I would seriously consider using it. My personal choice these days is Devuan (https://devuan.org/ https://devuan.org/), the systemd-free variant of Debian., and I suggest you consider using it without the non-free components, instead of Trisquel.

jraph 5y ago
You are mixing concepts that are at different levels. Free software is an answer to an ethical / political issue (user rights). Systemd is an answer to a technical problem (how to manage system services, to simplify a lot). And to each their own. It's good you found something that suits you in Devuan, but it has never been easier for me to tweak my systems since systemd landed on the distributions I use. Writing a service is a breeze, including free software I wrote. Things are fast at last. It took over for reasons, and I think those reasons are technical excellence and easier maintenance burden for distributions. I'm very happy with systemd. I don't feel like it "suppresses aspects of free software development" at all.