Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.devel > #106659 > unrolled thread

Populating non-free firmware?

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.devel

Contents

  Populating non-free firmware? Jonathan Carter <jcc@debian.org> - 2022-12-24 10:50 +0100
    Re: Populating non-free firmware? "M. Zhou" <lumin@debian.org> - 2022-12-24 18:20 +0100
      Re: Populating non-free firmware? Timothy M Butterworth <timothy.m.butterworth@gmail.com> - 2022-12-24 21:30 +0100
        Re: Populating non-free firmware? "Andrew M.A. Cater" <amacater@einval.com> - 2022-12-25 00:40 +0100
          Re: Populating non-free firmware? Philipp Kern <pkern@debian.org> - 2022-12-25 10:20 +0100
    Re: Populating non-free firmware? Bastian Blank <waldi@debian.org> - 2022-12-25 12:50 +0100
      Re: Populating non-free firmware? Jonathan Carter <jcc@debian.org> - 2022-12-25 19:30 +0100
        Re: Populating non-free firmware? "Henrique de Moraes Holschuh" <hmh@debian.org> - 2022-12-31 22:50 +0100

#106659 — Populating non-free firmware?

Hi Debianites

Earlier this year, we had a [vote] where we concluded that we'd include 
non-free firmware in the upcoming Debian 12 release. Steve posted a 
summary of [next steps] to this list, but it seems like we have some 
steps missing.

The non-free-firmware [component] has been created, but so far it only 
contains the rasbpi-firmware package.

I recall seeing various discussions about /what/ should be included in 
non-free-firmware (packages that install files under /lib/firmware seems 
like a reasonable approach), but it's unclear how that's going to happen.

Will the archive team be moving those over? Is it up to firmware 
packagers to re-upload it to the correct component?

As far as I recall, there was also some discussion between archive 
admins on whether non-free-firmware should contain copies of packages, 
or whether the packages should be moved (along with migration concerns 
for the latter).

Since we're so close to freeze, and since there are lots of bits that 
will be depending on this if we are to implement this for Debian 12, can 
we have some basic plan and communication put together for this so that 
everyone knows what to expect?

Thanks to everyone involved in this and putting in the work to make it 
happen!

-Jonathan

[vote] https://www.debian.org/vote/2022/vote_003

[next steps] 
https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/20221002142736.GA1700088@tack.einval.com

[component] http://ftp.debian.org/debian/dists/testing/non-free-firmware/

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#106661

On Sat, 2022-12-24 at 11:44 +0200, Jonathan Carter wrote:
> 
> The non-free-firmware [component] has been created, but so far it
> only 
> contains the rasbpi-firmware package.

Please ensure to include the packages for wifi cards, especially
the iwlwifi since I don't use desktop pc.

One of the most painful ways to install Debian is to realize that
iwlwifi is missing during the netinstall process, while RJ45 cable
is not available. As a result, one may download the package using
cellphone and find a way to transmit that file to the laptop.
If it's iphone then game is sadly over.

In the past, such frustration had once irritated one of the new
users to whom I have recommended Debian. The user's anger has
finally converted into personal/emotional attacks, blaming
me as a Debian developer being incompetent to make the wifi
card working. As a result, I as a Debian developer, would never
recommend Debian to any new user, nor discussing linux with
any new user since then.

iwlwifi is the very only reason that forced me to never use the
the default iso again.

That said, my word only counts as a vote for the wifi card packages.
Just wanted to mention that iwlwifi may hurt people.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#106663

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Sat, Dec 24, 2022 at 12:15 PM M. Zhou <lumin@debian.org> wrote:

> On Sat, 2022-12-24 at 11:44 +0200, Jonathan Carter wrote:
> >
> > The non-free-firmware [component] has been created, but so far it
> > only
> > contains the rasbpi-firmware package.
>
> Please ensure to include the packages for wifi cards, especially
> the iwlwifi since I don't use desktop pc.
>
> One of the most painful ways to install Debian is to realize that
> iwlwifi is missing during the netinstall process, while RJ45 cable
> is not available. As a result, one may download the package using
> cellphone and find a way to transmit that file to the laptop.
> If it's iphone then game is sadly over.
>
> In the past, such frustration had once irritated one of the new
> users to whom I have recommended Debian. The user's anger has
> finally converted into personal/emotional attacks, blaming
> me as a Debian developer being incompetent to make the wifi
> card working. As a result, I as a Debian developer, would never
> recommend Debian to any new user, nor discussing linux with
> any new user since then.
>
> iwlwifi is the very only reason that forced me to never use the
> the default iso again.
>
> That said, my word only counts as a vote for the wifi card packages.
> Just wanted to mention that iwlwifi may hurt people.
>
> I agree WiFi is needed. I have Realtek and it needs non-free firmware. I
also need the binary blobs for AMD Radeon. I use the non-free installer. If
not all firmware is going to be included in the installer will there still
be a non-free installer image?



-- 
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian - The universal operating system
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://www.debian.org/
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#106664

On Sat, Dec 24, 2022 at 03:22:17PM -0500, Timothy M Butterworth wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 24, 2022 at 12:15 PM M. Zhou <lumin@debian.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Sat, 2022-12-24 at 11:44 +0200, Jonathan Carter wrote:
> > >
> > > The non-free-firmware [component] has been created, but so far it
> > > only
> > > contains the rasbpi-firmware package.
> >
> > Please ensure to include the packages for wifi cards, especially
> > the iwlwifi since I don't use desktop pc.
>

I don't think there's any dispute here: we'll put in all of the non-free
firmware that's needed that's actually firmware.

The problem is a logistics one: the archives need to be split up, there
needs to be a transition plan, maybe the easiest way is to do NMU uploads

As I read the DPL's message it's a "Hey, we need to do this now and time
is running short, let's agree how to do it and actually do it" rather
than not including one driver and not another.

All best, as ever,

Andy Cater

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#106666

On 25.12.22 00:31, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:
> The problem is a logistics one: the archives need to be split up, there
> needs to be a transition plan, maybe the easiest way is to do NMU uploads

This is what (archive) overrides were invented for. However with the 
split maybe it'd be good for dak to temporarily export that component 
into both its own and non-free proper. That'd decouple the migration on 
the user side.

Kind regards
Philipp Kern

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#106667

On Sat, Dec 24, 2022 at 11:44:49AM +0200, Jonathan Carter wrote:
> Will the archive team be moving those over? Is it up to firmware packagers
> to re-upload it to the correct component?

AFAIK this requires a re-upload.  However, does the installer properly
include it yet?  I need to check that.

I can handle the main firmware packages maintained by the kernel team.

Bastian

-- 
Captain's Log, star date 21:34.5...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#106669

Hi Bastian

On 2022/12/25 13:32, Bastian Blank wrote:
> AFAIK this requires a re-upload.  However, does the installer properly
> include it yet?  I need to check that.
> 
> I can handle the main firmware packages maintained by the kernel team.

Great! That covers a large percentage of them (and even most of the 
important ones).

So if we're going with maintainers-are-going-to-do-the-uploads, then 
taking a cursory glance at what's left that seems important is:

  - firmware-sof-signed (maintainer: Mark Pearson)
  - intel-microcode (maintainer: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh)
  - amd64-microcode (maintainer: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh)

-Jonathan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#106704

On Sun, Dec 25, 2022, at 15:21, Jonathan Carter wrote:
> So if we're going with maintainers-are-going-to-do-the-uploads, then 
> taking a cursory glance at what's left that seems important is:
>
>   - firmware-sof-signed (maintainer: Mark Pearson)
>   - intel-microcode (maintainer: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh)
>   - amd64-microcode (maintainer: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh)

Please email me directly when it is time to do such upload changing the archive section.

I assume we (maintainers) don't need to do the usual dance of opening a bug to change the Dak override file for the package section ?  There is no point to any uploads before that file is updated AFAIK.

-- 
  Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@debian.org>

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.devel

csiph-web