On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 12:50:36AM +0200, Frans Pop wrote: > On Tuesday 12 September 2006 05:59, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > implementation of a solution for firmware/non-free drivers in d-i has > > > been discussed but consensus was that there was not much point in > > > working on it while there was no separation in the kernel; > > > > This is half-true. > > > > It is true that many high-profile drivers in the upstream kernel _still_ > > have their firmware mingled with the (often GPL'd) driver, and their > > developers show resistance to treating that as a bug. > > > > But it is also true that the upstream kernel has used the > > request_firmware() mechanism (for a subset of its drivers) for quite a > > while. As a random data point, the March 2, 2005 release of linux-2.6.11 > > included about 20 drivers that used that mechanism to load their > > firmware. So if the Debian project (kernel and d-i together) had > > interest in supporting the separation, there were ample test-cases > > available. > > I'm sorry, but I don't see what your comments have to do with discussion > about implementation _in Debian Installer_. They are probably true for the > discussion about firmware separation in the kernel, but that was not my > point.
Without support for non-free module or firmware .udebs, there is no point in doing the separation and move to non-free in the kernel, as this will hurt our users. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
