Canoeboot 25.04 "Corny Calamity" released! (free/libre BIOS/UEFI firmware replacement based on coreboot)
- Login o registrati per inviare commenti
I'm not ragebaiting. Lol all I did was write one - yes, one - post that linked to a new Canoeboot release.
I made no political statement or expressed an opinion of any kind. A bunch of people came to this thread who were already angry and clearly with bad faith, to try to "take me down a peg" - and their tactic relied on me being angry, because they wanted me to look bad.
Therefore, it could be said that I was ragebaited - but I didn't get raged, instead they just got angrier. Perhaps if the mod team is going to do anything at all, it should be against my (literal) detractors?
I've been nothing but a model citizen. I also genuinely want to be here on this forum. To me it's the other way around, the people who diss me here are the trolls and ragebaiters. All I want to do is promote Canoeboot, and I make no judgement of any kind about anyone.
That wasn't directed at you. :)
I know. I'm simply saying that, to anyone who reads this thread and has an objective mind, they will see that I simply promoted a Canoeboot release. That's all I did. That, and responded as politely as possible and with civility, to everyone here. No rage baiting!
If anything, I was civil baiting. I was trying to bait people into being civil.
Is calmbaiting a thing? Perhaps we could call it zenbaiting.
People have the right to stand up to bullies. IF you think that you are 100% right, thats what narcissists do.
I am not attempting to label, I am saying what I see with my own two eyes. I thought hatred wasn't tolerated in this forum?
And yet I am constantly flamed for my opinions and censored.
Its still better to have a mostly free bios then a completely non-free one.
I take back what I said long ago about you, the part about if Stallman retires. You would have made things worse. I hate having to say that, because it means I was wrong about your character.
You have disappointed me. I can feel your hatred, you and everyone else who censors my posts.
This is why the thumbs up and thumbs down should be removed, its abused for purposes of hate and narcissism.
To put it in simple terms, why do you have to be such a flamer?
That is also against the code of conduct as well.
Flaming and hating on people solves nothing.
I don't know what to say here...
I have said most of what I can think of, this will scare people away from your forum in droves.
Do you want to turn trisquel into another elitist community?
I hope not, because that is sad.
I feel kind of sad for people who deal with this nonsense...
-_-
Being mostly free is better than being completely non-free, but that doesn't make it good enough. If software freedom matters, don't aim for less and say it's better than total garbage. If you think about it, settling for "mostly free" is just a way to justify sticking with proprietary software, especially if it comes without a plan to move off of it. You deserve better than that. We all do. But of course, how would we ever know how stupid we are on that topic without you -- **and others** -- here to point it out? Please, don't deprive us of your wisdom. We might accidentally enjoy something you disapprove of.
You do have a fair point IF the people you speak of will choose fully free rather than non-free.
But if they would choose mostly free and would not be willing to go with mostly free, you would be completely incorrect.
Btw, it would still be wise to add canoeboot boards to gnuboot as stated elsewhere in many places. Or get a bigger team devoted to gnuboot, or all of the above.
Don't say "we" and "us" and "ourselves" - you are only speaking for yourself. I like Zoma, he's been a personal friend of mine online and offline for a lot of years, I'd like him to stay here. I don't agree with some of what he says, but we can debate the issues.
I stand by what I said. Describing people as obsessed, arrogant, stubborn narcissists who can’t accept new ideas isn't a debate. That's just name-calling. Debating means engaging with ideas, not attacking the people who hold them.
There's that narcissism at work. Geez... chill.
What is your problem?
And the people who thumbed you up? Man... I am beginning to wonder of Trisquel's user base is filled with narcissists.
So this is what Andy was talking about.
The hate is real...
OOF...
This started because Leah made the mistake of copying and pasting something (proprietary) without checking it before posting. Threads about Canoeboot updates are often ignored or received properly.
Yeah, one line from a changelog. The actual release itself is fine.
But you know, if people keep being angry, because they hate Leah Rowe / Canoeboot, shouldn't they like, *not* then start massively spamming the thread with their opinions? The longer they keep this up, the longer Canoeboot stays on the front page of Trisquel.
>"As I said earlier, this thread is getting heated mainly due to the narcissism of small differences."
It's getting heated due to people who joined the forum within the last one calendar month trolling Leah relentlessly, and claiming that a project that is actually fully libre and promoted by the FSF is somehow proprietary. For whatever it's worth.
Yes.
FSF campaigns page (2nd link in the main navigation menu *ON THE FSF HOME PAGE*:
https://www.fsf.org/campaigns/campaigns-summaries#free-bios
FSF Free BIOS Campaign page:
https://www.fsf.org/campaigns/free-bios.html
FSF Free Software Directory:
https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Canoeboot
Canoeboot is promoted quite prominently, on all of these pages. The FSF's own Craig Topham even audited Canoeboot personally; this is the person who does RYF evaluations.
The FSF is happy with Canoeboot. I know for a fact that several of their staff also use it.
So what's the problem? Perhaps I should mention these links from now on, every time I announce a Canoeboot release. That way, there can be no doubt, and anyone who complains in replies will more reliably be seen for what they are: petty, ignorant fools.
I'm not sure it helps. I've argued with people on this forum about the freeness of Rust, which is also listed in the FSF free software directory, and it usually goes nowhere.
In this thread, besides me, there are only two people who joined the Trisquel Forum in *2025*. One of them shows a genuine interest in Canoeboot and Leah Rowe's opinions, while the other thinks that she intentionally shared the "Libre"boot changelog instead of the Canoeboot one.
As I mentioned earlier, the "heat" arises from Leah's mistake in not verifying what she published — a "Libre"boot changelog. Although Leah quickly corrected herself, the lack of clarity led to criticism for writing the phrase "vendor file" instead of "proprietary software" or "free software". This criticism, while justified, attracted many people who are probably resentful of Leah, resulting in discusion about "Libre"boot in a thread dedicated to Canoeboot.
Only one user mixed up several concepts and accused Canoeboot of being proprietary software, which is false. As Leah mentions, the FSF even recommends Canoeboot alongside GNU Boot.
I have two recommendations:
1. Leah, make sure to thoroughly avoid posting information about "Libre"boot here. You already know what happens even if you correct your mistake.
As you can see, and as I mentioned earlier, threads about Canoeboot are often ignored or received properly: https://trisquel.info/users/libreleah/track
2. People who dislike proprietary software, I know "vendor file" is misleading, but isn't the name "Libreboot" misleading as well? Why bother?
It might be better for you to email Leah or speak with her privately about this specific issue, as I have thoroughly mentioned in this post, and as you can see for yourself, this thread is about Canoeboot, not "Libre"boot. Furthermore, this is not a forum for criticizing every proprietary aspect of software projects — it is a place to enjoy freedom.
No, since it is a recommendation, and the decision to follow it or not rests with the person receiving it. On the other hand, I acknowledge that you made a mistake (because I believe so), and I also clarified that you corrected it quickly.
>Lots of people here use libreboot, lots use coreboot, lots use laptops and computers with proprietary bios. There has never been a time in forum history that I am aware of where we are not actively discussing all of these. We are promoting the use of Trisquel on all machines, including old iMacs and new Ideapads and all kinds of devices, and we try to help people with the problems they have using Trisquel on them. Leah is free to talk about canoeboot, libreboot, coreboot, gnuboot, uboot, whatever she wants to discuss here, as long as she is willing to properly debate the pros and cons of her positions without resorting to incivility.
You are free to talk about proprietary software, but you shouldn't distribute, recommend or support proprietary software. This guideline is universal — it applies to everyone.
"Our community supports the Free Software Movement.
Our community's resources --the forum, documentation, etc-- are for free software only. Please do not distribute, recommend, or support non-free software here".
>Censorship makes no sense in the context of what we try to do on this forum.
There is no censorship, as the aforementioned (which corresponds to the Trisquel Community Guidelines) are guidelines, not rules.
A guideline is a recommendation or, as the name suggests, a line by which one is guided, suggesting how to act or proceed in certain situations. You are not obligated to follow them.
>Why do I find myself having to explain things to another person who just joined this forum within the past one calendar month?
It is a fallacy to assume that time spent in the forum equates to greater knowledge or authority within it. Anyway, what’s wrong with explaining something to a newcomer? If you think I said something incorrect, I would be glad for you to correct me.
>Where is this weird phenomenon of incessantly attacking Leah's ability to freely communicate words on this forum originating from?
I don't know, as I am unaware of such a phenomenon.
> Our community's resources --the forum, documentation, etc-- are for free software only. Please do not distribute, recommend, or support non-free software here.
OK, but I think this a gray area. Coreboot/Libreboot are not 100% free software, but they enable people to run a mostly free BIOS, as opposed to the completely proprietary one that the computer comes with. Unfortunately the blobs in the vast majority of cases have no replacements, and this is purely the fault of the vendors, not Coreboot/Libreboot developers. Nevertheless, Coreboot or Libreboot is a vast improvement over the BIOS that comes with most computers.
People here recommend computers that come with completely proprietary BIOSes all the time (even ThinkPenguin falls in this category I'm pretty sure, please correct me if I'm wrong) and I've never seen anyone have a problem with that so it seems strange to me that a mostly free BIOS is considered beyond the pale.
Many people also recommend me_cleaner, a project that takes a nonfree Intel ME firmware image and outputs a still nonfree firmware image (but with much less code) so that you can flash it. I've never seen criticism of this either.
I think the criticism should really be directed at the vendors which make these blobs, rather than Leah.
> There is no censorship, as the aforementioned (which corresponds to the Trisquel Community Guidelines) are guidelines, not rules.
One user actually was advocating for censorship of Leah's post above (calling for intervention from the moderators).
"Coreboot/Libreboot are not 100% free software"
False. Canoeboot is 100% free software, and follows GNU FSDG. It's listed on the FSF's main campaigns page, right alongside GNU's own coreboot distro. It's also listed on the FSF's Free Software Directory.
Neither the ROM images nor the src release tarballs contain blobs. It is all 100% Free Software, in Canoeboot. 100%. If you spot a blob in Canoeboot, I will remove it.
Are you stupid?
and libreboot is fully free software, depending what mainboard you install on.
I really want to know where people get these ideas. They say all kinds of stupid things that are completely false.
I didn't mention Canoeboot?
>OK, but I think this a gray area.
You think wrong. The guidelines are quite clear: "Please do not distribute, recommend, or support non-free software here". I remind you that we are in the Trisquel GNU/GNU Linux-libre forum and not in the Ubuntu uutils/Linux one.
>Coreboot/Libreboot are not 100% free software, but they enable people to run a mostly free BIOS, as opposed to the completely proprietary one that the computer comes with. Unfortunately the blobs in the vast majority of cases have no replacements, and this is purely the fault of the vendors, not Coreboot/Libreboot developers. Nevertheless, Coreboot or Libreboot is a vast improvement over the BIOS that comes with most computers.
Nevertheless, there are free BIOS replacements like GNU Boot.
>People here recommend computers that come with completely proprietary BIOSes all the time (even ThinkPenguin falls in this category I'm pretty sure, please correct me if I'm wrong) and I've never seen anyone have a problem with that so it seems strange to me that a mostly free BIOS is considered beyond the pale.
There is no problem in recommending proprietary hardware if it can be freed to operate with free software.
Here you have a list of the aforementioned: https://www.gnu.org/software/gnuboot/web/docs/hardware/
It's not strange. Please read the following article: https://www.gnu.org/distros/common-distros.html
>Many people also recommend me_cleaner, a project that takes a nonfree Intel ME firmware image and outputs a still nonfree firmware image (but with much less code) so that you can flash it. I've never seen criticism of this either.
Please use the term "peripheral software" to refer to it. "Firmware" is misleading, as such software lacks firmness and often leads people to believe that it is not software.
On the other hand, you shouldn't recommend me_cleaner in general, but rather for those who have already acquired a computer like the T480. Suggesting the purchase of a T480 to use me_cleaner, considering that this computer will not boot without executing proprietary malware, is sad.
No one is stopping you from doing so, but it is not just. As you can see in the list I shared earlier, there are desktop and laptop computers that boot without executing proprietary software.
>I think the criticism should really be directed at the vendors which make these blobs, rather than Leah.
It is not necessary to include proprietary software in a Coreboot distribution for a computer to boot freely.
>One user actually was advocating for censorship of Leah's post above (calling for intervention from the moderators).
There is no need to censor anyone — misinformation is countered with information.
> There is no problem in recommending proprietary hardware if it can be freed to operate with free software.
The ThinkPenguin computers have a proprietary BIOS and cannot be freed. ThinkPenguin laptops are (or at least were) commonly recommended on this forum and its CEO was quite active here for many years. Actually there even used to be an ad for ThinkPenguin on the right-hand side of the page.
It's not just ThinkPenguin, this forum has generally accepted discussion of buying non-RYF computers. E.g. people talking about buying the NovaCustom laptop (which has Coreboot but with blobs): https://trisquel.info/en/forum/trying-out-new-novacustom-laptop-work-today
https://trisquel.info/en/forum/coreboot-computers-novacustom
> Please use the term "peripheral software" to refer to it. "Firmware" is misleading, as such software lacks firmness and often leads people to believe that it is not software.
Firmware is a commonly accepted term and I'm not going to change my usage of it because one person objects to it (I've never heard anyone but you object to the term). Also the ME firmware does not run on a peripheral so your replacement term is nonsensical. This now makes me think that you are a troll.
> you shouldn't recommend me_cleaner in general, but rather for those who have already acquired a computer like the T480.
In this case, what is wrong with recommending Coreboot/Libreboot for the same people? What you seem to be suggesting is that these people should run me_cleaner to remove most of the proprietary ME firmware code, but they should not replace most of the proprietary BIOS code.
> It is not necessary to include proprietary software in a Coreboot distribution for a computer to boot freely.
It is not possible to boot those computers freely at all. Thus Coreboot with some blobs is a vast improvement, for those who use these computers.
> The ThinkPenguin computers have a proprietary BIOS and cannot be freed. ThinkPenguin laptops are (or at least were) commonly recommended on this forum and its CEO was quite active here for many years. Actually there even used to be an ad for ThinkPenguin on the right-hand side of the page.
How sad.
> It's not just ThinkPenguin, this forum has generally accepted discussion of buying non-RYF computers. E.g. people talking about buying the NovaCustom laptop (which has Coreboot but with blobs): https://trisquel.info/en/forum/trying-out-new-novacustom-laptop-work-today
https://trisquel.info/en/forum/coreboot-computers-novacustom
Even more sad. I recommend reading nparafe's response in the first thread you shared, as it is misleading — removing Intel ME from such computers is not possible — they need to execute the Intel ME initialization proprietary software to boot. The second thread explicitly mentions a purchase of handcuffed hardware, so there is no need for interjection — you are free to surrender your freedom.
> Firmware is a commonly accepted term and I'm not going to change my usage of it because one person objects to it (I've never heard anyone but you object to the term).
"Linux" is an accepted term for referring to the GNU operating system, and it is incorrect.
The term "firmware" first appeared in the late 1960s (Ascher Opler, 1967) to describe the "intermediate" software between hardware and high-level software, which was originally stored in non-reprogrammable mask ROMs — hence the name "firm-ware" ("firm software").
However, today, almost all "firmware" (BIOS/UEFI, routers, printers, disk controllers, etc.) resides in rewritable flash memory (EEPROM, NOR/NAND), which can be updated electronically ("flashing") without the need to physically replace the chip.
This means that modern "firmware" no longer retains the firmness implied by its original etymology.
Since you or the manufacturer can update the "firmware" electronically, it is just software — peripheral if it runs on an auxiliary processor.
On the other hand, if something were completely immutable (neither you nor the manufacturer could electronically update it), then it would be hardware.
> Also the ME firmware does not run on a peripheral so your replacement term is nonsensical.
Doesn't the Intel ME operate by itself and separate from the main processor, the BIOS, and the operating system, but it interacts with the BIOS and the operating system?
> This now makes me think that you are a troll.
Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. Please don't resort to name-calling.
> In this case, what is wrong with recommending Coreboot/Libreboot for the same people? What you seem to be suggesting is that these people should run me_cleaner to remove most of the proprietary ME firmware code, but they should not replace most of the proprietary BIOS code.
Nothing. "Libre"boot mitigates Intel ME using me_cleaner.
> It is not possible to boot those computers freely at all. Thus Coreboot with some blobs is a vast improvement, for those who use these computers.
Correct.
> Even more sad. I recommend reading nparafe's response in the first thread you shared, as it is misleading — removing Intel ME from such computers is not possible — they need to execute the Intel ME initialization proprietary software to boot. The second thread explicitly mentions a purchase of handcuffed hardware, so there is no need for interjection — you are free to surrender your freedom.
I think many people on this forum make such compromises because modern x86 hardware is impossible to boot without blobs. Not everyone here wants to buy a 16 year old Thinkpad. You can consider it sad all you want, but discussion of buying such hardware has never been discouraged on this forum (I've been here for over a decade at this point).
> The term "firmware" first appeared in the late 1960s (Ascher Opler, 1967) to describe the "intermediate" software between hardware and high-level software, which was originally stored in non-reprogrammable mask ROMs — hence the name "firm-ware" ("firm software").
And the guy who coined the term predicted that firmware would one day be reprogrammable.
> Doesn't the Intel ME operate by itself and separate from the main processor, the BIOS, and the operating system, but it interacts with the BIOS and the operating system?
It's a separate microprocessor but it's not a peripheral. Also, the BIOS (technically UEFI nowadays) is also firmware and runs on the main processor. So your term "peripheral software" doesn't make sense as a replacement for the term firmware. And as I said, you're the first one I heard complain about the term firmware.
> Correct.
So we are in agreement here. And this is why I believe discussion of Coreboot/Libreboot is a perfectly reasonable topic on this forum.
> I think many people on this forum make such compromises because modern x86 hardware is impossible to boot without blobs.
x86 is not modern by itself.
> Not everyone here wants to buy a 16 year old Thinkpad.
GNU Boot supports x86_64 computers, such as the KGPE-D16, which can operate with up to 32 cores and 256 GB of RAM, making it ideal for compiling large source trees or performing any type of computation that requires significant processing power. The KCMA-D8 is also available, supporting up to 16 cores and 64 GB of RAM.
> You can consider it sad all you want, but discussion of buying such hardware has never been discouraged on this forum (I've been here for over a decade at this point).
Did I say that?
> It's a separate microprocessor but it's not a peripheral.
Then just call it software, as it lacks firmness.
>Also, the BIOS (technically UEFI nowadays) is also firmware and runs on the main processor.
It is not, as it lacks firmness.
> So your term "peripheral software" doesn't make sense as a replacement for the term firmware.
Since you or the manufacturer can update the "firmware" electronically, it is just software — peripheral if it runs on an auxiliary processor.
On the other hand, if something were completely immutable (neither you nor the manufacturer could electronically update it), then it would be hardware.
> And as I said, you're the first one I heard complain about the term firmware.
Too bad for you. You can see that GNU Boot, for example, has started to describe its project as follows: "GNU Boot is a 100% free *software* project aimed at replacing the non-free boot *software* (like BIOS or UEFI) of computers with free boot *software*".
This doesn’t change the fact that the GNU Boot documentation and whatnot still needs a lot of work — there are very important patches that have not yet been applied.
> Then just call it software, as it lacks firmness.
I will call it by the term in the dictionary, thank you very much.
> it is just software — peripheral if it runs on an auxiliary processor
It is software, and it is also firmware. Even the FSF says this: https://www.fsf.org/blogs/sysadmin/closing-in-on-fully-free-bioses-with-the-fsf-tech-team
> The key blocking factor is that those CPUs require certain *firmware* in the BIOS, like Intel Management Engine.
And while the ME is an auxiliary processor, it's not a peripheral as it is part of the Intel chipset and the computer (unfortunately) is nonfunctional without it.
Anyway, I'm not going to change my usage of a word that is in accordance with the dictionary definition, just because one person on the Internet said it is bad.
> I will call it by the term in the dictionary, thank you very much.
Is your dictionary Wikipedia? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux)
> It is software, and it is also firmware.
It is software and not "firmware", as it lacks firmness.
> Even the FSF says this
Even the FSF can make mistakes. It is our duty to identify and correct them.
The FSF has used and continues to use terms that Richard Stallman himself recommends avoiding because they are misleading or harmful to free software.
> And while the ME is an auxiliary processor, it's not a peripheral as it is part of the Intel chipset and the computer (unfortunately) is nonfunctional without it.
I reiterate: since you or the manufacturer can update the "firmware" electronically, it is just software — peripheral if it runs on an auxiliary processor.
> Anyway, I'm not going to change my usage of a word that is in accordance with the dictionary definition, just because one person on the Internet said it is bad.
I did not say that the term "firmware" is bad, but rather that it is false and misleading.
You might want to be unmistaken when you see such a term listed here: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html
In the meantime, you are free to be mistaken.
When did Richard Stallman reject the word firmware? And anyway, I have a lot of respect for him but I don't worship him. It's also not listed in the list that you linked.
Post edited due to duplicate.
I think the same to be honest. Because of past differences, people feel the need to pile down on Leah, acting like she is worthy of everyone's disapproval regardless of her intentions.
I just don't get where this hate comes from. Its clear this isn't about non-free vs free software.
This is about trying to shut people up, sorry you got pushed in the middle of this.
All of this hate just because of a harmless blob, despite the fact that the blob exists in gnuboot and canoeboot too.
microcode being baked in, makes both of those non-free anyhow.
I feel like making the minuses and pluses anonymous allows people to feel superior and to stick out their tongue at people.
I wish people would stop thumbing down your posts.
Anywho, I don't know why people have to be so... impossible, but it makes me truly sad.
Reiterating, sorry you got dragged into this Legimet
Btw, if the mods see this post, I think this thread should be locked, its just causing unhealthy interactions between the community and others.
@david feel free.
Please share the "blob" that exists in GNU Boot and Canoeboot.
On the other hand, the microcode embedded in the processor is hardware, not software. Microcode updates are indeed software — proprietary and potentially malicious.
That's not my understanding. Also, unrelated but, usbs work in gnu/linux. not that I mentioned that before, but I imagine there must be a blob making that work too.
A new version of Canoeboot is great news. Canoeboot is a solution for a problem.
The problem is that some computers are sold with a BIOS that can be used as a backdoor, and that has restraints in place so that replacing it with a Libre replacement would disable the computer. Whose fault it is? It is all the manufacturers’ fault. Let’s not forget that.
Canoeboot is one of the very few existing solutions for that problem. It is my understanding that:
* For older computers such as older Thinkpads, Canoeboot does not use vendor files at all.
* For newer computers, there is no way to replace the BIOS without including a fraction of the vendor files.
For people seeking to get completely rid of vendor files, Canoeboot might seem to be an insufficient solution – but it is a step in the right direction nevertheless, it has already managed to completely liberate older computers, and it provides hope that a way can be found some day to completely liberate newer computers as well, it is progress. Anyway, if it is still insufficient for you, what you would call for is for more effort, and more people, working in the same direction. You would call for more.
For people wanting to control computer users by using a restrictive BIOS, Canoeboot is the enemy. If you want to control what people do, you would want Canoeboot to end. You would call for less.
Canoeboot is free software and does not support computers that operates with proprietary software: https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Canoeboot
I've gotten requests via text and email from forum readers to ask Dave to please go ahead and lock this thread down as it's outlived its usefulness.
So just passing that along Dave, if you are around, that is the current request.
And before that, I'd like to take a moment to say that I do appreciate all that Leah has done and continues to do, and look forward to Leah's continued libre-tization of ever more firmware in the near future. Leah and I have not always seen eye-to-eye and have had some mild disagreements in the past, but it's clear that Leah has more than earned respect and praise for moving the ball ever forward with a goal of 100% free firmware on all effected devices. We are not there yet, but the goal and the effort are commendable.
I salute you, sir. Thank you for your support.