From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755385AbYIJXPi (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Sep 2008 19:15:38 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754216AbYIJXPR (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Sep 2008 19:15:17 -0400 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([18.85.46.34]:41023 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754132AbYIJXPQ (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Sep 2008 19:15:16 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH] firmware: Allow release-specific firmware dir From: David Woodhouse To: David Miller Cc: jeffm@suse.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org In-Reply-To: <20080910.160505.14060698.davem@davemloft.net> References: <48C68507.6000609@suse.com> <1221087719.13621.50.camel@macbook.infradead.org> <20080910.160505.14060698.davem@davemloft.net> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2008 16:15:11 -0700 Message-Id: <1221088512.13621.58.camel@macbook.infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.22.3.1 (2.22.3.1-1.fc9) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by bombadil.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2008-09-10 at 16:05 -0700, David Miller wrote: > > Tell that to every Debian and Debian derived system on the planet. > > To my knowledge, it is only fedora and possibly one or two other dists > that put the firmware files in a unary /lib/firmware location, rather > than a versioned /lib/firmware/$KERNELRELASE one. So every time they upgrade from one kernel to the next, do they automatically run b43-fwcutter again to make a new copy of the firmware, for the new kernel? Or if they use QLogic SCSI cards, do they download a new (but identical) version of the firmware each time they upgrade their kernel? It sounds like a daft arrangement to me -- although of course it's possible for the packager to do whatever they like, by overriding $(INSTALL_FW_PATH) in their package build. It's definitely not something we should be doing upstream though. -- David Woodhouse Open Source Technology Centre David.Woodhouse@intel.com Intel Corporation