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

Groups > linux.debian.kernel > #75092 > unrolled thread

Can 'testing' firmware-nonfree packages be added to bullseye-backports repo?

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

Contents

  Can 'testing' firmware-nonfree packages be added to  bullseye-backports repo? "Kevin P. Fleming" <kevin@km6g.us> - 2022-04-20 16:30 +0200
    Re: Can 'testing' firmware-nonfree packages be added to bullseye-backports repo? Diederik de Haas <didi.debian@cknow.org> - 2022-04-20 19:50 +0200
      Re: Can 'testing' firmware-nonfree packages be added to  bullseye-backports repo? "Kevin P. Fleming" <kevin@km6g.us> - 2022-04-20 20:10 +0200
        Re: Can 'testing' firmware-nonfree packages be added to  bullseye-backports repo? "Kevin P. Fleming" <kevin@km6g.us> - 2022-04-21 19:30 +0200

#75092 — Can 'testing' firmware-nonfree packages be added to bullseye-backports repo?

I'm using Bullseye but with the kernel from bullseye-backports, both
to help testing and also because it handles my Lenovo docking station
better than the 5.10 kernel does.

While trying to track down some strange suspend+CPU fan behavior, I
noticed that when the kernel initializes the i915 iGPU, it complains
that it can't find the firmware it is expecting. This is because the
kernel is in the backports repo, but the firmware packages are not.

If it's not possible for the firmware packages to be included in the
backports repo then I can configure my system to grab them from
'testing', although at that point there may not be any value in using
the kernel packages from the backports repo... could just using the
'testing' kernel packages too.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#75093 — Re: Can 'testing' firmware-nonfree packages be added to bullseye-backports repo?

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

On Wednesday, 20 April 2022 16:05:24 CEST Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
> If it's not possible for the firmware packages to be included in the
> backports repo then I can configure my system to grab them from
> 'testing', although at that point there may not be any value in using
> the kernel packages from the backports repo... could just using the
> 'testing' kernel packages too.

The kernel from Testing could transitively pull in other packages from Testing 
which may result in the best course of action being upgrading entirely to 
Testing, which I guess is not what you want.
I'm quite sure that problem will not happen with firmware packages from 
Testing. I can understand it's more convenient to have firmware packages in 
backports too, but it should be quite safe to grab just *firmware* packages 
from Testing.

HTH

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

#75094

Then that is what I will do, thank you!

On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 1:41 PM Diederik de Haas <didi.debian@cknow.org> wrote:
>
> On Wednesday, 20 April 2022 16:05:24 CEST Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
> > If it's not possible for the firmware packages to be included in the
> > backports repo then I can configure my system to grab them from
> > 'testing', although at that point there may not be any value in using
> > the kernel packages from the backports repo... could just using the
> > 'testing' kernel packages too.
>
> The kernel from Testing could transitively pull in other packages from Testing
> which may result in the best course of action being upgrading entirely to
> Testing, which I guess is not what you want.
> I'm quite sure that problem will not happen with firmware packages from
> Testing. I can understand it's more convenient to have firmware packages in
> backports too, but it should be quite safe to grab just *firmware* packages
> from Testing.
>
> HTH

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

#75110

For what it's worth, I've done exactly that (installed the entire
suite of firmware packages from the testing repo) and as best I can
tell it has cured the problem I was having. Specifically after some
period of time of the laptop being up, the fan would speed up from
~2200RPM to ~3600RPM for no apparent reason, and stay there for hours.
If the laptop happened to be in suspend mode when this happened, I'd
return to a dead laptop since it would drain the battery. The air
coming out of the fan exhaust was not warm, and xsensors reported
fairly low temperatures for all of the internal sensors.

So, it may be worth getting the newer firmware packages into the
bullseye-backports repository after all :-)


On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 1:48 PM Kevin P. Fleming <kevin@km6g.us> wrote:
>
> Then that is what I will do, thank you!
>
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 1:41 PM Diederik de Haas <didi.debian@cknow.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Wednesday, 20 April 2022 16:05:24 CEST Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
> > > If it's not possible for the firmware packages to be included in the
> > > backports repo then I can configure my system to grab them from
> > > 'testing', although at that point there may not be any value in using
> > > the kernel packages from the backports repo... could just using the
> > > 'testing' kernel packages too.
> >
> > The kernel from Testing could transitively pull in other packages from Testing
> > which may result in the best course of action being upgrading entirely to
> > Testing, which I guess is not what you want.
> > I'm quite sure that problem will not happen with firmware packages from
> > Testing. I can understand it's more convenient to have firmware packages in
> > backports too, but it should be quite safe to grab just *firmware* packages
> > from Testing.
> >
> > HTH

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

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

csiph-web