Hi, Marco d'Itri <m...@linux.it> (2024-04-09): > Yes. Nowadays kmod has many more features related to compressed modules > and verification of signatures. > Can we agree that kmod should provide these programs for d-i? > Or can the d-i maintainers just tell us what they want?
I meant to come back to this after experimenting, then things happened… I picked kmod at the time because it worked, and because busybox didn't work, which I summed up in: https://salsa.debian.org/installer-team/debian-installer/-/commit/450daf0bd24ee94d4f466ab65908c079ef795145 (plus follow-up commit, woopsie https://salsa.debian.org/installer-team/debian-installer/-/commit/69777be465c5d0210d16159a456ab88535513a07 ) I'm fine with sticking to kmod regarding module support in d-i. I'm not sure we should keep support in two different modules, so dropping it from busybox would work for me. Others might have different views on this, though. Cheers, -- Cyril Brulebois (k...@debian.org) <https://debamax.com/> D-I release manager -- Release team member -- Freelance Consultant
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
