| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
On 02/16/2013 10:29 AM, Maxim Kammerer wrote: |
| 5 |
> On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 8:14 AM, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina |
| 6 |
> <zerochaos@g.o> wrote: |
| 7 |
>>>> Kernel sources providing /lib/firmware itself shouldn't be a problem |
| 8 |
>>>> either, as that's just a dir, which many packages may own. The |
| 9 |
>>>> individual firmware files would be a problem, but the USE=firmware |
| 10 |
>>>> RDEPEND solution should solve that. |
| 11 |
>>> |
| 12 |
>> What is everyone's opinion of adding a USE=firmware option to pull in |
| 13 |
>> PDEPEND="linux-firmware" in linux-2.eclass? |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> Not exactly an opinion, but a couple of notes: |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> 1. Kernel's "make modules_install" triggers "make firmware_install", |
| 18 |
> which installs a strict subset of linux-firmware (for enabled modules |
| 19 |
> — e.g., "3com/typhoon.bin"). A way to work around that is to supply |
| 20 |
> INSTALL_FW_PATH=... to make. |
| 21 |
> 2. CONFIG_PREVENT_FIRMWARE_BUILD=y does not prevent installing |
| 22 |
> firmware by "make modules_install". |
| 23 |
> 3. Trough all this firmware discussion, everyone is acting as if it's |
| 24 |
> obvious that linux-firmware was always preferred to individual |
| 25 |
> packages. This is not the case — some Gentoo developers didn't even |
| 26 |
> know about linux-firmware when creating individual packages, as is |
| 27 |
> evident from messages in discussion. I tried to figure which to use |
| 28 |
> some time ago, and came to conclusion that more often than not, |
| 29 |
> individual packages are preferable, because they are versioned/slotted |
| 30 |
> and go through a proper stabilization process (e.g., iwlwifi). Perhaps |
| 31 |
> that conclusion was incorrect, but the point is that information on |
| 32 |
> the subject was scarce, to say the least. |
| 33 |
> |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
1.) No new firmware is being added to the linux kernel anymore, so this |
| 36 |
doesn't apply at all. |
| 37 |
2.) Fun fact but I don't see how that make much difference to anyone or |
| 38 |
this thread. |
| 39 |
3.) I'm sorry if it is not yet obvious to people that this is a package |
| 40 |
upstream has been moving slowly towards requiring, but, they have. My |
| 41 |
email was SPECIFICALLY addressing this by suggesting that we add it as a |
| 42 |
pdep (optionally) to show people just how important it is. |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
- -Zero |
| 45 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 46 |
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) |
| 47 |
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ |
| 48 |
|
| 49 |
iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJRIGXGAAoJEKXdFCfdEflKIuEQAIrB+R3ADrgdG5Q7aqUTy3+H |
| 50 |
o1K0eEpBKMg6Fi8q9um0b2mxw0lqUAgeob+RdKzkaFATueFmLB8DU8BUBr3RTSxe |
| 51 |
XxQ2KcAsfJxWqBcHx/wFwqXyVkink+AhXg/956hUa0I3TpSjsc7BkPHjIaJw3QBb |
| 52 |
AjwpUpr9T0CVpovTQ8LcFaNfxIH1kHcXku0cX8ZC72vXEDZN9My9QBGPsH6HTYPE |
| 53 |
TA6PSviBQimODookyaAYgkOzBlqDA98ClZb7sY7zmo4Ca/e0wC3eSVexwNxo7Nfr |
| 54 |
+4mMzTy8TPwv7hckAgZiOzDQ7RQKC+s7f2/gHXNENb9ittd8aBc982tfxlF6wTgc |
| 55 |
PHXsn+owgA/VQsVlyMw6ctUFgW3lDeQBuc9/WPgGXvfTvSUQ1ROhg7DmBH7Iyr1C |
| 56 |
8l04sL3kmZ9PqAw2j13Kf56mxFaFA+L/uwhV6cAw2rEpLpIfvwV9trR+BmO69Hem |
| 57 |
tph58uh6cGXfWOXtUM+kEacXswvWpLi0yD8/g3WH8jbkGBIobKf6deYcbkPjZWyQ |
| 58 |
STm/Qq6xHyibpBBBZWgungvSG5gvf+73crq+femjKUgB7yCVnXaMrTODSXVKhkX0 |
| 59 |
sZ+K+Bp5XqexVGlcbLvtXmIW7OJB4L7Yiml5zzx6Vqu/hMld/CSdLo/3rLf2TCSW |
| 60 |
IhfHQl5LKrFt0MGyFLR/ |
| 61 |
=n36q |
| 62 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
Archives