On Wednesday, December 23, 2020 9:52:16 AM EST Steve McIntyre wrote: > Is this just going to be for x86 machines, or is it likely to be useful for > ~everybody? It will be useful for all architectures, except I don't think there are FreeBSD and Hurd drivers yet, but it's an arch:all package regardless. > IIRC d-i uses kernel messages to work out what firmware to use. Is the > kernel driver still going to be looking for the older (non-free) firmware > still? If so, that should probably be changed. Well, the "nonfree" (quotes because I suspect it's built from the same free source, but by definition we can't be sure without an identical binary) firmware currently hijacks the proper name of the firmware. I'd love for my package to take it over, but if not a hack could be to set the kernel option to look for the "development" firmware. > Ah... It would be more *normal* to ship the source. Is there a reason > not to? Sorry, should've revised my footnote from the mail to the kernel team. None of the firmware in firmware-free is built from source, and that's what I was expressing concern to. To the best of my knowledge, this package is the first to be built as such. (Given the recent Lenovo discussion on -devel about having to ship that firmware in non-free, I suspect this is little-known.)
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.