On Sat 27 Feb 2021 at 17:32:34 +0000, Justin B Rye wrote: > John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > > On 2/27/21 11:46 AM, Holger Wansing wrote: > >> John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de> wrote (Sat, 27 > >> Feb 2021 11:21:58 +0100): > >>> The point is: We separate free and non-free images for a very reason and > >>> if > >>> you add a mechanism that just silently enables non-free on a system that > >>> was installed with the free installer, you are defeating this separation. > >> > >> 1. *I* do not do or change anything here. It's the case like this for ages! > > > > Of course, you are. You are sending in a patch. > > But is that patch one that "silently enables non-free" and "taints" > the official installer? All I see it doing is giving expert users > more convenient access to the mechanism they can already use on the > console to get their hardware working properly.
I wouldn't use the term "silently enables non-free" myself. However, the patch blatently pushes users towards using non-free. Considering that one of the targets of the patch is "newbie users", expert mode leaves them in the cold, as many of them use Install. > If only we knew of a plausible use case for a kind of "additional > package" that someone might install this way *other* than firmware, I > suspect that would make this more palatable. The nearest I can think > of is that I hear tales of people setting up a local repo with a > "LAN-standard package-set" metapackage. Any takers? > > >> 2. non-free does *NOT* be *silently* activated! The user is prompted for > >> this, > >> and he needs to explicitly say YES to this option! > >> And this question is only be asked in expert installation mode. > > > > You are contradicting yourself. Earlier in the discussion you claim that the > > user just enters the name of the firmware packages and the installer does > > the rest of the work. > > *If* the user has configured apt appropriately, it's already possible > to do this via a console. Holger's idea is that if people often need > to do that, the installer could just offer a dialog. Why use a console when early_command, late_command and pkgsel are at hand? BTW. What is this "official installer"? Is the same as "the installer"? -- Brian.
