Bug#676921: ITP: amd64-microcode -- Processor microcode firmware for AMD CPUs
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > > The package template system currently only supports one optional
> > > postinst action, but it wouldn't be hard to extend to add others.
Ok, I tried to ship the microcode for amd processors using firmware-nonfree.
There are a few problems:
1. firmware-nonfree seems to be very tightly tied to module names. We'd
need to join all microcode upstream packages under "microcode" which is the
module name. This is not a good thing IMO.
2. firmware-nonfree simply doesn't want to work without MODULE_FIRMWARE
support in the official kernel-image, that somehow migrates to magic binary
dumps in the -support package for that image, that gets used by
firmware-nonfree to generate its own metadata. Yikes!
3. firmware-nonfree _really_ needs a README.source :-)
So, I am stumped. Assuming it is simply not a matter of me not groking how
to shoehorn firmware-nonfree to do what I need, at this point, it either
means we need some changes to firmware-nonfree so that it can ALSO work as a
generic multi-upstream dumping ground for stuff that does not benefit from
(or actively gets harmed by) the automation it currently does, or that we
should have separate source packages for such stuff, and leave
firmware-nonfree for regular firmware that fits well with the automation it
currently implements.
Any ideas?
--
"One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
Henrique Holschuh
Reply to: