On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 03:47:56PM +0000, Robert Lemmen wrote: > On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 03:33:49PM +0100, Pierre Habouzit wrote: > > For the sake of 10 binary firmwares, you want to make whole Debian > > depend upon non-free ? Wow, what an achievement. > > ok, i think i came across in a wrong way, because that is certainly not > what i want! > > but look at it this way: if we have a package that contains totally > non-free firmware which is required to make it work, we basically have a > few choices: > > 1. the whole package has to go to non-free > 2. the package is split up into a non-free part and one that goes in > main, which then cannot depend on the non-free one > 3. the same, but with a dependency and the parts go to contrib and > non-free respectively no that's not how it will work. The split will be (and that's the sole *reasonnable* way to do it) to put firmwares away, it *different* source packages in non-free. The kernel will have patches to load those firmwares on demand (and fail if they're not here). This is what Ben did, and what needs testing. The kernel doesn't need to depend on the firmwares at _all_. All other options are silly and should not even be mentioned, unless the expected reactions to it are nervous laughs. -- ·O· Pierre Habouzit ··O madcoder@debian.org OOO http://www.madism.org
Attachment:
pgpN_sOqD_2PE.pgp
Description: PGP signature