Quoting Russ Allbery (2022-04-19 23:57:21) > Jonas Smedegaard <jo...@jones.dk> writes: > > Quoting Russ Allbery (2022-04-19 19:29:09) > > >> We need some way to clearly label non-free firmware packages so > >> that you can apply whatever installation or upgrade policy locally > >> that you want to apply, but solution #5 provides that by keeping > >> the non-free firmware in a separate archive area (which apt calls > >> "components") to which you can apply different apt policy. > > > The issue I have with option 5 is that non-free blobs are then > > enabled by default. > > I just re-read option 5 and I don't see where it says that. My > understanding of the proposal is that the firmware would be on the > image and thus available to the installer. That doesn't imply that it > will be automatically enabled, either in the installer or on the > installed system. That could still be gated by a prompt.
Oh. Re-reading again myself, and I agree. Sorry for all the noise: I support option 5. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
signature.asc
Description: signature
