[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Debian-installer, older hardware, boot loaders, miboot & amiboot & ..

Jeremie Koenig wrote:
> The plan was to request a sarge-ignore tag on the "d-i build-depends on
> miboot, which is in contrib", and try to find a better solution for next
> releases.

This is the first I've heard of this. Has the sarge-ignore status of the
GFDL docs really created such a slippery slope? I doubt it.

Sven Luther wrote:
> Well, the solution would be to force add the miboot stuff to the
> debian-installer svn tree, and use it to build. This would make
> debian-installer contrib/non-free though, which is why i asked for
> debain-legal help.
> Note that one solution for this would be to make an exception for such
> bootloader stuff, and have them in the debian-installer SVN, in a
> boot-loader directory or something, and use them directly. This will not
> break autobuild, and everything would be fine, except when you upload
> said stuff to main.

That would violate the TOS for alioth. Do not check non-free code into
the d-i subversion repository.

You are free to set up your own fork of the debian-installer package,
call it "debian-installer-non-free", and upload it to non-free or contrib,
and arrange to build the non-free boot images from it. That would be one

Another way might be to use the debian-installer package to build images
with a dummy, free boot loader (all zero's, say), and provide a
third-party tool to make the resulting images really bootable, by
applying the real boot loader to them. The resulting images would not be
official d-i images, but I think it would be ok to include the
non-bootable ones in the archive, with an appropriate bug filed on d-i
about their non-bootable status.

see shy jo

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: