On Sat, 2009-08-15 at 14:16 -0500, James Bottomley wrote: > On Sat, 2009-08-15 at 19:21 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > > On Sat, 2009-08-15 at 10:47 -0700, James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com > > wrote: > > > Package: linux-image-2.6.30-1-686 > > > Version: 2.6.30-5 > > > Severity: serious > > > Justification: Policy 2.2.1 > > > > That very same section explains why we cannot do what you are > > suggesting! > > No, it doesn't ... the decision to put firmware-linux in non-free is > obviously wrong, since the same firmware was shipped as is in main with > 2.6.26-2 There have been a series of GRs that confirmed that sourceless firmware belongs in non-free. Although violations were not considered for etch and lenny, they were bugs (in this case, #494308). > > > On upgrade from 2.6.30-2-686 networking (on a remote machine) failed to > > > start, meaning that a support ticket had to be opened for KVM access. > > > > I don't recommend running unstable on production machines. > > If you bother to read the bug report, you'd see it's actually running > testing. The same goes for testing. > > > Diagnosis revealed that the e100 driver in 2.6.26-2-686 required no > > > firmware, so the firmware-linux package wasn't installed. Apparently > > > 2.6.30-1-686 was built with external firmware for the e100 so it now > > > depends on the firmware-linux package. > > > > > > This is a serious policy violation because required hardware stops > > > working after the upgrade. > > > > No, most systems do not require the firmware-linux package. > > That's not really relevant, is it? linux-image ships with a ton of > drivers most systems don't use as well. It is certainly relevant to the question of whether firmware-linux should be a dependency. > The point is that what was working before the upgrade didn't work after > it. I'm sorry about that but the change has been agreed by the project. > > > Fix suggested is to make 2.6.30-1-686 depend on linux-firmware so that > > > on upgrade the necessary firmware is present. > > > > I intend to ensure that firmware-linux is mentioned in the release notes > > for squeeze, but it cannot be recommended or made a dependency. > > So this amounts to ... assuming the user can find the notice (because > there's a blizzard of notices that go with each upgrade, particularly if > they're going from lenny -> squeeze) you'll tell them that you broke > their system? > > The point here is to try and ensure large numbers of systems don't break > before this exits testing for stable. Then please put your effort into ensuring that this change is prominently announced at the time of the squeeze release. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings Never put off till tomorrow what you can avoid all together.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part