If Debian support OS certification?

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
36 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

If Debian support OS certification?

Eric Lai (賴裕文)

Hello,

 

This is Eric from Quanta Cloud Technology, Taiwan.

 

I am in charge of server hardware certification.

 

Currently, we have capability of Windows, RHEL, SLES, Ubuntu cert, etc…

 

We would like to know if Debian can perform hardware certification as well.

 

If support, please advise the process and any document we can refer it.

 

Thanks.

Best Regards,

Eric

 

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: If Debian support OS certification?

Paul Wise via nm
On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 10:27 AM, Eric Lai (賴裕文) wrote:

> This is Eric from Quanta Cloud Technology, Taiwan.
> I am in charge of server hardware certification.
> We would like to know if Debian can perform hardware certification as well.
> If support, please advise the process and any document we can refer it.

At this time, Debian does not have a formal hardware certification program.

If you are interested in checking how Debian works with your hardware,
you could have your developers do the work, or hire consultants who
are familiar with Debian to test compatibility with your hardware.

https://www.debian.org/distrib/
https://www.debian.org/consultants/
https://lists.debian.org/debian-consultants/

We have a section on the wiki where users can report their hardware experiences:

https://wiki.debian.org/InstallingDebianOn

There is a similar service called h-node that is for all libre Linux distros:

https://h-node.org/

We have a couple of lists of hardware that ships with Debian out of
the box. If Quanta are shipping Debian on your hardware, feel free to
register an account on our wiki and edit the ShippingWithDebian page.

https://wiki.debian.org/Hardware/ShippingWithDebian
https://wiki.debian.org/DebianHardware

Ultimately, Debian relies on the upstream Linux kernel community for
most of our hardware support, so getting any needed drivers or patches
included upstream will mean that Debian supports your hardware.

https://www.kernel.org/
https://kernelnewbies.org/UpstreamMerge

Please also consider adding support for your servers to the coreboot
firmware project:

http://coreboot.org/

PS: in 2018 the annual Debian conference will be held in Hsinchu,
Taiwan. It would be great if Quanta could help fund DebConf18 and
Quanta developers could attend DebConf18.

https://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf18

Sponsorship information for 2017 is listed here:

https://debconf17.debconf.org/sponsors/become-a-sponsor/

--
bye,
pabs

https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: If Debian support OS certification?

Paul Wise via nm
On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 12:17 PM, Paul Wise wrote:

> At this time, Debian does not have a formal hardware certification program.

I forgot to mention that we have experimental service called LAVA for
automated hardware testing using Debian. Quanta could create a local
hardware lab that would submit test results to Debian, please see the
wiki page for more information about that:

https://wiki.debian.org/LAVA
https://lava.debian.net/

--
bye,
pabs

https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: If Debian support OS certification?

Eric Lai (賴裕文)
Hi Paul,

Thanks for your information.

I will discuss with my team internally. If have further question/problem, will let you know.

Best Regards,
Eric


-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Paul Wise
Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2017 8:36 AM
To: Eric Lai (賴裕文)
Cc: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: If Debian support OS certification?

On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 12:17 PM, Paul Wise wrote:

> At this time, Debian does not have a formal hardware certification program.

I forgot to mention that we have experimental service called LAVA for automated hardware testing using Debian. Quanta could create a local hardware lab that would submit test results to Debian, please see the wiki page for more information about that:

https://wiki.debian.org/LAVA
https://lava.debian.net/

--
bye,
pabs

https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: If Debian support OS certification?

Paul Wise via nm
In reply to this post by Paul Wise via nm
On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 8:35 AM, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 12:17 PM, Paul Wise wrote:
>
>> At this time, Debian does not have a formal hardware certification program.
>
> I forgot to mention that we have experimental service called LAVA for
> automated hardware testing using Debian. Quanta could create a local
> hardware lab that would submit test results to Debian, please see the
> wiki page for more information about that:

I forgot to mention that the upstream Linux kernel community has a
similar service called kernelci that is also based on LAVA. If you do
setup a hardware lab it would be a good idea to have it send test
results to kernelci too:

https://kernelci.org/
https://kernelci.org/faq/

Some articles that mention it:

https://lwn.net/Articles/662882/
https://lwn.net/Articles/717221/

--
bye,
pabs

https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: If Debian support OS certification?

Thomas Goirand-3
In reply to this post by Paul Wise via nm
On 03/14/2017 05:17 AM, Paul Wise wrote:

> On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 10:27 AM, Eric Lai (賴裕文) wrote:
>
>> This is Eric from Quanta Cloud Technology, Taiwan.
>> I am in charge of server hardware certification.
>> We would like to know if Debian can perform hardware certification as well.
>> If support, please advise the process and any document we can refer it.
>
> At this time, Debian does not have a formal hardware certification program.
>
> If you are interested in checking how Debian works with your hardware [...]

Paul and others,

While it is nice to answer the way you did, here, Debian is missing yet
another opportunity that other commercial distro would not. Maybe we
should have a BoF at debconf Montreal about this.

Quanta is a company shipping servers. If I'm not mistaking, they're
located in Shanghai. One thing they used to do (and probably continue to
do) is building servers matching open specifications from the "open
compute" project. That really appeals to Debian moral standards, IMO.

What they are interested about, is having *us*, Debian, to certify that
their hardware work on our system, so that their customer trust they can
buy it to run Debian. It'd be a bit weird if they were certifying
themselves.

Now one idea: one way we could provide the certification would be asking
for hardware sponsorship. This way, we (ie: the DSA team) would get
"free" hardware, in exchange for a certification. Obviously, we'd need
to discuss this with the DSA.

Then we'd need a kind of "Debian certified hardware" logo that we would
agree the certified company use for some hardware. This would need SPI
approval, since that's the entity owning the rights for the Debian logo.

Thoughts anyone?

Cheers,

Thomas Goirand (zigo)

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: If Debian support OS certification?

Paul Wise via nm
On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 5:15 AM, Thomas Goirand wrote:

> While it is nice to answer the way you did, here, Debian is missing yet
> another opportunity that other commercial distro would not. Maybe we
> should have a BoF at debconf Montreal about this.

Please do register a BoF, I'd be happy to attend if I can.

> Quanta is a company shipping servers. If I'm not mistaking, they're
> located in Shanghai. One thing they used to do (and probably continue to
> do) is building servers matching open specifications from the "open
> compute" project. That really appeals to Debian moral standards, IMO.

Thanks for the info.

> What they are interested about, is having *us*, Debian, to certify that
> their hardware work on our system, so that their customer trust they can
> buy it to run Debian. It'd be a bit weird if they were certifying
> themselves.

I think that Debian members/contributors do not and should not hold a
monopoly on verifying that Debian works on a particular piece of
hardware.

I think a better approach would be to produce a Debian Live image that
on boot checks as much of the hardware as possible automatically and
lists a checklist for verifying the rest of the hardware works. Anyone
could run the image and the resulting report could be uploaded to
hardware.d.o, where it would be displayed publicly and count as a
"certification". This way users can trust Debian to run on the
hardware and there is no monopoly on certification. ISTR Ubuntu's
certification stuff works similarly except that only Ubuntu can give
the certification mark, probably in exchange for money.

In any case, hardware vendors are in a much better position to be able
to certify that Debian runs on their hardware than we are. They know
exactly what functionality should be present and have access to get
more hardware in case running Debian bricks their devices.

> Now one idea: one way we could provide the certification would be asking
> for hardware sponsorship. This way, we (ie: the DSA team) would get
> "free" hardware, in exchange for a certification. Obviously, we'd need
> to discuss this with the DSA.

With my DSA hat on, we don't like being guinea pigs for development
boards and pre-release hardware. This kind of hardware tends to be
unreliable and require too much hand-holding. That said, we definitely
welcome hardware sponsorship and partners.

> Then we'd need a kind of "Debian certified hardware" logo that we would
> agree the certified company use for some hardware. This would need SPI
> approval, since that's the entity owning the rights for the Debian logo.

I expect we can probably get a logo created by updating this:

https://wiki.debian.org/DebianArt/RequestArtwork

Often it takes some promotion for the right people to notice though.

--
bye,
pabs

https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: If Debian support OS certification?

Luca Filipozzi
On Tue, May 02, 2017 at 08:35:07AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 5:15 AM, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>
> > While it is nice to answer the way you did, here, Debian is missing yet
> > another opportunity that other commercial distro would not. Maybe we
> > should have a BoF at debconf Montreal about this.
>
> Please do register a BoF, I'd be happy to attend if I can.

Me, also.

> > Quanta is a company shipping servers. If I'm not mistaking, they're
> > located in Shanghai. One thing they used to do (and probably continue to
> > do) is building servers matching open specifications from the "open
> > compute" project. That really appeals to Debian moral standards, IMO.
>
> Thanks for the info.
>
> > What they are interested about, is having *us*, Debian, to certify that
> > their hardware work on our system, so that their customer trust they can
> > buy it to run Debian. It'd be a bit weird if they were certifying
> > themselves.
>
> I think that Debian members/contributors do not and should not hold a
> monopoly on verifying that Debian works on a particular piece of
> hardware.
>
> I think a better approach would be to produce a Debian Live image that
> on boot checks as much of the hardware as possible automatically and
> lists a checklist for verifying the rest of the hardware works. Anyone
> could run the image and the resulting report could be uploaded to
> hardware.d.o, where it would be displayed publicly and count as a
> "certification". This way users can trust Debian to run on the
> hardware and there is no monopoly on certification. ISTR Ubuntu's
> certification stuff works similarly except that only Ubuntu can give
> the certification mark, probably in exchange for money.
>
> In any case, hardware vendors are in a much better position to be able
> to certify that Debian runs on their hardware than we are. They know
> exactly what functionality should be present and have access to get
> more hardware in case running Debian bricks their devices.

Wearing my DSA hat: fully agree.

> > Now one idea: one way we could provide the certification would be asking
> > for hardware sponsorship. This way, we (ie: the DSA team) would get
> > "free" hardware, in exchange for a certification. Obviously, we'd need
> > to discuss this with the DSA.
>
> With my DSA hat on, we don't like being guinea pigs for development
> boards and pre-release hardware. This kind of hardware tends to be
> unreliable and require too much hand-holding. That said, we definitely
> welcome hardware sponsorship and partners.

Wearing my DSA hat: fully agree. So tired of flakey hardware.

Wearing my Partners hat: what value a certification that was 'bought' by
donating hardware (or a variable amount of funding) to Debian. I'd prefer a
declared fee structure for the service, for transparency. That said, I'd far
prefer Paul's suggestion of a Live CD.

> > Then we'd need a kind of "Debian certified hardware" logo that we would
> > agree the certified company use for some hardware. This would need SPI
> > approval, since that's the entity owning the rights for the Debian logo.
>
> I expect we can probably get a logo created by updating this:
>
> https://wiki.debian.org/DebianArt/RequestArtwork
>
> Often it takes some promotion for the right people to notice though.

--
Luca Filipozzi
http://www.crowdrise.com/SupportDebian

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: If Debian support OS certification?

Ritesh Raj Sarraf-4
In reply to this post by Paul Wise via nm
On Tue, 2017-05-02 at 08:35 +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> > What they are interested about, is having *us*, Debian, to certify that
> > their hardware work on our system, so that their customer trust they can
> > buy it to run Debian. It'd be a bit weird if they were certifying
> > themselves.
>
> I think that Debian members/contributors do not and should not hold a
> monopoly on verifying that Debian works on a particular piece of
> hardware.
>

As members, we should come up with a "Certification Policy" guide. Which should
define what constitutes a particular machine being marked certified. Then a
testsuite could be built accordingly.

> I think a better approach would be to produce a Debian Live image that
> on boot checks as much of the hardware as possible automatically and
> lists a checklist for verifying the rest of the hardware works. Anyone
> could run the image and the resulting report could be uploaded to
> hardware.d.o, where it would be displayed publicly and count as a
> "certification". This way users can trust Debian to run on the
> hardware and there is no monopoly on certification. ISTR Ubuntu's
> certification stuff works similarly except that only Ubuntu can give
> the certification mark, probably in exchange for money.
>
It will have to go beyond the "does boot" scope, in my opinion. Like most other
Enterprise Linux Distributions, Debian too picks a particular kernel (stable-
lts) and to some extent also backports fixes into it.

That makes it a completely unique kernel, against which certification needs to
be done. In all the certification tools I've worked with, rigorous stress tests
are the most important part. For example, for file systems, doing large amounts
of I/O with different chunks; Buffered and Direct I/O etc. Single queue, multi
queue. WRITE_SAME and TRIM related HW Commands.

CPU Burn, Memory tests, Network etc. All core components of a server hardware
needs tests to certify any server hardware.

> In any case, hardware vendors are in a much better position to be able
> to certify that Debian runs on their hardware than we are. They know
> exactly what functionality should be present and have access to get
> more hardware in case running Debian bricks their devices.

Yes. But I think we need to provide a tool, process and guideline for them to
follow. So far, from what I've checked, not much engagement has been initiated
from the hardware vendors.

--
Given the large number of mailing lists I follow, I request you to CC
me in replies for quicker response

signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: If Debian support OS certification?

Paul Wise via nm
On Tue, 2017-05-02 at 23:29 +0530, Ritesh Raj Sarraf wrote:

> As members, we should come up with a "Certification Policy" guide. Which should
> define what constitutes a particular machine being marked certified. Then a
> testsuite could be built accordingly.

Sounds good to me, would you mind starting a wiki page for this?

> It will have to go beyond the "does boot" scope, in my opinion.

Clearly, since each bit of hardware in each particular situation has a
probably unique set of features that need testing in their own way.
For example if there is a USB missile launcher attached, it should
definitely use isenkram install pymissile and ask the user to run the
tests for that.

> Like most other Enterprise Linux Distributions, Debian too picks a
> particular kernel (stable- lts) and to some extent also backports
> fixes into it. That makes it a completely unique kernel, against
> which certification needs to be done.

It is true that we use a unique version of Linux/kFreeBSD/Hurd but I
would advocate a different approach. There is a lot of hardware that
will never run mainline Linux and will never be able to be fully
supported by Debian. These systems should be able to be certified to
work with Debian but the certification would make it clear which
version of each component was used, including those that were not from
Debian. For example ARM systems will be able to have OpenGL but only
with the proprietary binary drivers. Other systems will be able to run
one release of Debian but not another (for example my MIPS router can
run jessie but not stretch because the CPU requirements changed).

> In all the certification tools I've worked with, rigorous stress
> tests are the most important part. For example, for file systems,
> doing large amounts of I/O with different chunks; Buffered and Direct
> I/O etc. Single queue, multi queue. WRITE_SAME and TRIM related HW
> Commands. CPU Burn, Memory tests, Network etc.

That sounds like a description of anarcat's stressant project.

https://gitlab.com/anarcat/stressant

> All core components of a server hardware needs tests to certify any
> server hardware.

I would strongly suggest *not* limiting this project to servers.
There are at least various types of cloud providers, laptops, desktops,
SBCs, routers, TVs etc that Debian can probably run on in some way.

> Yes. But I think we need to provide a tool, process and guideline for them to
> follow. So far, from what I've checked, not much engagement has been initiated
> from the hardware vendors.

I think instead of a tool, we want a framework for packages available
in Debian to provide both automatic and manual instructions for testing
things outside of the Debian system. Then we want a setup that can run
the automatic tests and provide the manual instructions to the user.
The process would then be: boot ISO, wait for auto tests, do manual
tests and enter results, click submit, take photo of certification and
or save any digital artefacts of the certification to external media.

--
bye,
pabs

https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise

signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: If Debian support OS certification?

Ben Hutchings-3
On Wed, 2017-05-03 at 16:55 +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Tue, 2017-05-02 at 23:29 +0530, Ritesh Raj Sarraf wrote:
[...]

> > Like most other Enterprise Linux Distributions, Debian too picks a
> > particular kernel (stable- lts) and to some extent also backports
> > fixes into it. That makes it a completely unique kernel, against
> > which certification needs to be done.
>
> It is true that we use a unique version of Linux/kFreeBSD/Hurd but I
> would advocate a different approach. There is a lot of hardware that
> will never run mainline Linux and will never be able to be fully
> supported by Debian. These systems should be able to be certified to
> work with Debian
[...]

No, they should not, otherwise this certification becomes meaningless.
Basically any system using one of our supported architectures can run a
'Debian' system with some custom components added.  But that system is
unlikely to get prompt updates to fix kernel security bugs - or maybe
any updates at all, depending on how the vendor (mis)configured APT.

If the vendor (or their SoC supplier) chooses to fork and not to
contribute back to Linux, they must accept the consequences, and we
should not endorse that fork.

Certification should mean that you can use the Debian installer or an
official Debian image on the system.  If it actually requires a custom
installer or image created by the vendor, that is out of our control
and ability to support.

(I leave aside the question of whether 'Debian' would include the
contrib and non-free sections.  I think that realistically we would
have to add a second tier of certification for the vast majority of
systems that require installation of non-free firmware for important
components like the GPU or network interface.)

Ben.

--
Ben Hutchings
friends: People who know you well, but like you anyway.


signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: If Debian support OS certification?

Andre Felipe Machado-3
Hello,
We developed a very detailed sequence of compatibility and  disk and storage stress tests  , including nfsv4, to homologate disk and storage systems for government
profile and scale IMAP loads on Debian systems.
Fio tests carefully modeled Cyrus IMAP real world behaviour at such scale, confirmed at cyrus project list.
Maybe one can find useful to ADAPT such tests as part of Debian certification. Almost all commands depends on available RAM and CPU count, bandwidth, etc. The test
procedures were for stress storage systems not for Debian itself.
You could download PDF linked at page at
https://comunidadeexpresso.serpro.gov.br/mediawiki/index.php/Infra/DataStorageServers
Despite written in brazilian portuguese, the command lines listed are easily readable.
Regards.
Andre Felipe
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: If Debian support OS certification?

Paul Wise via nm
In reply to this post by Ben Hutchings-3
On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:17 AM, Ben Hutchings wrote:

> No, they should not, otherwise this certification becomes meaningless.

I see these certifications primarily as a service to Debian users and
not as endorsements of vendors, but as statements of fact. The
consequences to users should stated as part of the certification
output. "This system can run Debian main", "This system is missing
drivers for XYZ", "This system requires non-free firmware", "This
system requires a custom bootloader", "This system requires a custom
kernel", "This system requires a custom kernel and must use sysvinit",
"This system requires an unofficial Debian port", "This system
requires recompiling Debian from scratch" (CPU requirements bumps or
CPU bugs). Basically, a more automated version of InstallingDebianOn.

If Debian only certifies systems installed using official d-i images
then we won't be certifying much, since almost everything requires
preinstalled or runtime-loaded non-free firmware for some part of the
system. We would basically only be able to certify RYF devices and may
as well just require FSF RYF certification up-front before a system
can be certified for Debian use.

Since we already need two tiers of certifications for main vs
non-free, is it really that much of a problem to add some more as long
as our users are informed of the issues they will face? Users are
going to buy or acquire those problematic systems anyway, especially
in areas where there are almost zero devices that Debian could be
certified for (for eg mobile devices). If they do and then decide to
run Debian, information about what the consequences are would be
useful.

--
bye,
pabs

https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: If Debian support OS certification?

Steve McIntyre
On Thu, May 04, 2017 at 07:56:45AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:

>On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:17 AM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
>
>> No, they should not, otherwise this certification becomes meaningless.
>
>I see these certifications primarily as a service to Debian users and
>not as endorsements of vendors, but as statements of fact. The
>consequences to users should stated as part of the certification
>output. "This system can run Debian main", "This system is missing
>drivers for XYZ", "This system requires non-free firmware", "This
>system requires a custom bootloader", "This system requires a custom
>kernel", "This system requires a custom kernel and must use sysvinit",
>"This system requires an unofficial Debian port", "This system
>requires recompiling Debian from scratch" (CPU requirements bumps or
>CPU bugs). Basically, a more automated version of InstallingDebianOn.
>
>If Debian only certifies systems installed using official d-i images
>then we won't be certifying much, since almost everything requires
>preinstalled or runtime-loaded non-free firmware for some part of the
>system. We would basically only be able to certify RYF devices and may
>as well just require FSF RYF certification up-front before a system
>can be certified for Debian use.

Are you really claiming that systems already shipped with *firmware
included* can't be installed using d-i? That's rather bogus, if
so. Please explain?

--
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.                                [hidden email]
  Mature Sporty Personal
  More Innovation More Adult
  A Man in Dandism
  Powered Midship Specialty

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: If Debian support OS certification?

Ben Hutchings-3
In reply to this post by Paul Wise via nm
On Thu, 2017-05-04 at 07:56 +0800, Paul Wise wrote:

> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:17 AM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
>
> > No, they should not, otherwise this certification becomes meaningless.
>
> I see these certifications primarily as a service to Debian users and
> not as endorsements of vendors, but as statements of fact. The
> consequences to users should stated as part of the certification
> output. "This system can run Debian main", "This system is missing
> drivers for XYZ", "This system requires non-free firmware", "This
> system requires a custom bootloader", "This system requires a custom
> kernel", "This system requires a custom kernel and must use sysvinit",
> "This system requires an unofficial Debian port", "This system
> requires recompiling Debian from scratch" (CPU requirements bumps or
> CPU bugs). Basically, a more automated version of InstallingDebianOn.
If we require that vendors make those caveats clear in any self-
certification, then I agree that this could be useful.

> If Debian only certifies systems installed using official d-i images
> then we won't be certifying much, since almost everything requires
> preinstalled or runtime-loaded non-free firmware for some part of the
> system. We would basically only be able to certify RYF devices and may
> as well just require FSF RYF certification up-front before a system
> can be certified for Debian use.

Well I already acknowledged that, didn't I?

> Since we already need two tiers of certifications for main vs
> non-free, is it really that much of a problem to add some more as long
> as our users are informed of the issues they will face?

My concern was that the bar you were setting was so low as to be
useless for distinguishing systems that are well supported by Debian
from those that are not.

> Users are
> going to buy or acquire those problematic systems anyway, especially
> in areas where there are almost zero devices that Debian could be
> certified for (for eg mobile devices). If they do and then decide to
> run Debian, information about what the consequences are would be
> useful.

Right.

Ben.

--
Ben Hutchings
If the facts do not conform to your theory, they must be disposed of.


signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: If Debian support OS certification?

Paul Wise via nm
In reply to this post by Steve McIntyre
On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 8:03 AM, Steve McIntyre wrote:

> Are you really claiming that systems already shipped with *firmware
> included* can't be installed using d-i? That's rather bogus, if so.
> Please explain?

That was the result of writing mail too early in the morning.

--
bye,
pabs

https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: If Debian support OS certification?

Paul Wise via nm
In reply to this post by Ben Hutchings-3
On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 8:23 AM, Ben Hutchings wrote:

> Well I already acknowledged that, didn't I?

Yes, I felt like re-stating it.

> My concern was that the bar you were setting was so low as to be
> useless for distinguishing systems that are well supported by Debian
> from those that are not.

That is definitely something we want to avoid. I guess we would want
the front page to be the devices certified to the best available
standard and things certified to lesser standards could be on other
pages.

--
bye,
pabs

https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: If Debian support OS certification?

Thomas Goirand-3
In reply to this post by Paul Wise via nm
On 05/02/2017 02:35 AM, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 5:15 AM, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>
>> While it is nice to answer the way you did, here, Debian is missing yet
>> another opportunity that other commercial distro would not. Maybe we
>> should have a BoF at debconf Montreal about this.
>
> Please do register a BoF, I'd be happy to attend if I can.

I'm still not 100% sure if I can make it to Montreal, though I've never
the less registered such a BoF. The title is:

Vendor hardware certification BoF

Cheers,

Thomas Goirand (zigo)

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: If Debian support OS certification?

Thomas Goirand-3
In reply to this post by Paul Wise via nm
On 05/02/2017 02:35 AM, Paul Wise wrote:
> With my DSA hat on, we don't like being guinea pigs for development
> boards and pre-release hardware. This kind of hardware tends to be
> unreliable and require too much hand-holding. That said, we definitely
> welcome hardware sponsorship and partners.

Absolutely. However, you may know that commercial distros are making
their certification program a non-free (as in: you must pay your beer)
thing. I do believe it'd be a fair way to get free (as in free beer)
hardware for the DSA team. It's up to us to define the terms.

Cheers,

Thomas Goirand (zigo)

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: If Debian support OS certification?

Ben Hutchings-3
On Fri, 2017-05-05 at 16:54 +0200, Thomas Goirand wrote:

> On 05/02/2017 02:35 AM, Paul Wise wrote:
> > With my DSA hat on, we don't like being guinea pigs for development
> > boards and pre-release hardware. This kind of hardware tends to be
> > unreliable and require too much hand-holding. That said, we definitely
> > welcome hardware sponsorship and partners.
>
> Absolutely. However, you may know that commercial distros are making
> their certification program a non-free (as in: you must pay your beer)
> thing. I do believe it'd be a fair way to get free (as in free beer)
> hardware for the DSA team. It's up to us to define the terms.
Free as in free kittens?

Ben.

--
Ben Hutchings
The program is absolutely right; therefore, the computer must be wrong.


signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
12