From: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
To: Frans Pop <elendil@planet.nl>
Cc: davem@davemloft.net, jeffm@suse.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
torvalds@linux-foundation.org, Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] firmware: Allow release-specific firmware dir
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2008 07:50:27 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1221144627.8593.9.camel@macbook.infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200809111152.58187.elendil@planet.nl>
On Thu, 2008-09-11 at 11:52 +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> Solution 2:
(separate firmware package)
This is what we're doing in Fedora, and what I think makes most sense.
At the moment, Fedora's package is still taken from the kernel source --
but fairly shortly, we'll move to building it from the linux-firmware
repository on kernel.org. That repository contains everything that's in
the kernel tree, and more -- now that we have it completely separate,
more companies are willing to allow us to include their firmware. We've
already rounded up some which were previously separate, and we'll
shortly be adding more firmware files which weren't previously available
to Linux users at all, except by copying it from the Windows installer.
> a) naturally allows firmware to be split between "free" and "non-free"
Indeed. So it allows the 'free software or nothing' nutters to have
their own replacement firmware package with none of the nasty stuff they
don't like.
> b) places a burden on the end-user to install/upgrade the firmware he
> needs separately from the kernel
Not really. The new kernel package can just require the firmware
package. There's not really much of a burden on the end-user, is there?
> c) makes system installation more complex as the right additional firmware
> package(s) need to be retrieved and installed
It's a simple dependency, handled just like dependencies normally are --
it's not exactly a giant leap in complexity.
> d) will break installed systems on upgrades (unless special measures are
> taken): users may need to install additional firmware packages on a
> kernel upgrade to keep a driver working
I have yet to see reports of it breaking Fedora. You upgrade the kernel,
the firmware package is automatically installed to satisfy the
dependency. And it just works.
Really, people seem to be imagining problems where they don't exist. I
don't want to just dismiss real problems -- but I don't _see_ real
problems either. Just people like Dave screaming "you broke it for real
users, like Herbert"... and Herbert saying "er, no you didn't really."
So I have to take it with a pinch of salt.
--
David Woodhouse Open Source Technology Centre
David.Woodhouse@intel.com Intel Corporation
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-09-11 14:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 58+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-09-09 14:15 Jeff Mahoney
2008-09-10 22:35 ` Andrew Morton
2008-09-11 13:37 ` Greg KH
2008-09-10 23:01 ` David Woodhouse
2008-09-10 23:05 ` David Miller
2008-09-10 23:15 ` David Woodhouse
2008-09-10 23:24 ` Andrew Morton
2008-09-11 2:55 ` Theodore Tso
2008-09-10 23:24 ` David Miller
2008-09-10 23:36 ` David Woodhouse
2008-09-10 23:42 ` David Miller
2008-09-11 0:23 ` Herbert Xu
2008-09-11 0:39 ` David Woodhouse
2008-09-11 7:44 ` Marcel Holtmann
2008-09-11 8:13 ` Jeff Mahoney
2008-09-11 16:09 ` Marcel Holtmann
2008-09-11 8:29 ` Faidon Liambotis
2008-09-11 16:12 ` Marcel Holtmann
2008-09-11 8:58 ` Frans Pop
2008-09-11 16:16 ` Marcel Holtmann
2008-09-11 8:43 ` Frans Pop
2008-09-11 9:52 ` Frans Pop
2008-09-11 14:50 ` David Woodhouse [this message]
2008-09-11 15:24 ` Frans Pop
2008-09-11 15:31 ` David Woodhouse
2008-09-11 15:49 ` Frans Pop
2008-09-11 15:57 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-09-11 16:32 ` Frans Pop
2008-09-11 17:49 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-09-11 18:24 ` Frans Pop
2008-09-11 16:01 ` David Woodhouse
2008-09-11 4:00 ` David Newall
2008-09-11 6:35 ` Faidon Liambotis
2008-09-11 7:15 ` Jeff Mahoney
2008-09-11 13:38 ` Theodore Tso
2008-09-11 14:36 ` Jeff Mahoney
2008-09-11 16:29 ` Marcel Holtmann
2008-09-11 16:20 ` Marcel Holtmann
2008-09-11 11:29 ` Thierry Vignaud
2008-09-11 13:40 ` Greg KH
2008-09-11 16:39 ` Marcel Holtmann
2008-09-11 16:45 ` David Woodhouse
2008-09-11 20:18 ` Greg KH
2008-09-11 20:15 ` Greg KH
2008-09-11 20:38 ` David Woodhouse
2008-09-11 20:57 ` Greg KH
2008-09-11 21:15 ` David Woodhouse
2008-09-11 22:07 ` Greg KH
2008-09-11 22:25 ` David Woodhouse
2008-09-12 8:39 ` Joseph Fannin
2008-09-12 13:50 ` Gene Heskett
2008-09-12 14:32 ` David Woodhouse
2008-09-12 20:24 ` Kai Henningsen
2011-02-25 2:39 Jeff Mahoney
2011-02-25 5:01 ` Michael Tokarev
2011-02-25 15:03 ` Jeff Mahoney
2011-02-25 16:54 ` David Woodhouse
2011-03-01 0:48 ` Andrew Morton
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1221144627.8593.9.camel@macbook.infradead.org \
--to=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=elendil@planet.nl \
--cc=jeff@garzik.org \
--cc=jeffm@suse.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome