Re: Going ahead with non-free-firmware

[Ansgar Burchardt <ansgar@debian.org>]

Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org> writes:
> On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 6:51 PM, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
>> I think there was consensus to introduce the non-free-firmware section
>> and move the non-free firmware blobs there.  I'm wondering what we need
>> to do next?
>
> I have a question about the implementation; will non-free firmware be
> in non-free and non-free-firmware or just non-free-firmware?

Just in non-free-firmware.  This means users will have to update their
sources.list, but they will have to do so anyway[1].

There are at least two reasons for this: having a package in two
locations means one has to keep track of them so every action like
removing or adding it to a suite has to be done in sync.  Also dak
splits the pool/ directory by component[2]: having the same package in
two components means file duplications (though firmware probably is
quite small).

Ansgar

  [1] <https://lists.debian.org/debian-security/2015/12/msg00015.html>
  [2] If I were to implement this again, I wouldn't support multiple
      components per suite: just have separate suites sid, sid-contrib,
      sid-non-free. The files could still be split across different
      areas of pool/ per suite, but no source packages is main that
      also build binaries in the contrib section or other such
      complications.