Re: Changing how we handle non-free firmware
On Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 04:26:40PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 11:26:51AM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> > Hey Wouter!
> > On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 12:19:55PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > >On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 08:58:21PM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> > >> system will *also* be configured to use the non-free-firmware
> > >> component by default in the apt sources.list file.
> > >
> > >What's the rationale for this one?
> > >
> > >I think it would make more sense to only configure the system to enable
> > >the non-free-firmware component if the installer determines that
> > >packages from that component are useful for the running system (or if
> > >the user explicitly asked to do so).
> > That's a fair point, my text was unclear here. Let's tweak it:
> > "Where non-free firmware is found to be necessary, the target system
> > will *also* be configured to use the non-free-firmware component by
> > default in the apt sources.list file."
> > Does that sound better?
> Is this something you want to adopt?
> Would a non-free-firmware section in the archive be useful, so
> that other non-free software is not enabled by default?
The placeholder in the archive has already been set up: I think that
happened in Kosovo.
All the very best