On 10/2/22 22:02, Russ Allbery wrote:
Michael Biebl <bi...@debian.org> writes:
The main difference is, that the renaming caused an error message by
apt, so you knew something needed to be fixed.
One could argue that having non-free but not non-free-firmware is
sufficiently strange that it would be worth a suppressable apt warning
(that you could turn off in apt.conf). I have no idea how easy that would
be to implement, though.
Hi!
I would very much prefer having this implemented in the base_files
package. This is *the* package that follows releases, so that's IMO the
best location.
I would hate having to use an upgrade program like in Ubuntu. :/
An easy check could be:
1/ are we upgrading from base-files << 12.3 (we're currently at 12.2 in Sid)
AND
2/ is there the non-free repo installed in the default sources.list
AND
3/ non-free-firmware repo isn't installed
THEN
warn user with debconf.
Checking the configuration of a non-free and non-free-firmware is kind
of hard, because just reading/parsing source.list and source.list.d that
could be filled with non-debian repos can be quite hard. Though we could
imagine tricks, like where both repo would include a special package
present only for that test, and we just see if it is available with
apt-cache policy for example (this is just an idea... not sure if
there's better options).
Eventually, and propose automatically adding the n-f-f repo, if some of
you really want to, but I'd prefer if at least this could be the
non-default debconf answer (because on non-interactive setup, without
access to internet (only to a local mirror), this could really mess
things up).
Your thoughts everyone?
Cheers,
Thomas Goirand (zigo)
P.S: I'm unfortunately *not* volunteering for implementing the above as
I wont have enough time to do it properly, though I just hope my above
suggestion helps...
