On Sat, 2023-07-08 at 17:17 -0400, bill-auger wrote:
> actually i sent that to soon - there are two other things i would make issue
> of
> 
> 'flashrom' is an arch package, so we can not modify the pkgdesc without
> adopting the package - i assumed that the pkgdesc of 'flashrom' in this thead
> was the one arch uses; but it is not so we can not use it for comparison
> 
> the arch pkgdesc:
> > Utility for reading, writing, erasing and verifying flash ROM chips
> 
> the problem is that both packages meet that description - though the proposed
> pkgdescs did not mention 'verifying'; so it is not clear if they both have
> that feature
> 
> then upon reading them more closely, what is evident per the proposed
> descriptions, is that 'flashrom' has _all_ features of 'flashrom-stable' and
> _more_ - that implies to me that 'flashrom-stable' has no value to parabola,
> which is the reason i began making a fuss about it in the first place
> 
> so again, per those descriptions, it appears that its only value to parabola
> is
> "its not as rusty" (though that is probalby not a good rationale, and the
> pkgdesc does not mention that anyways)
> 
> so, i think this should be revised again, so that it somehow clarifies any
> rationale for 'flashrom-stable'
> 
> ie: what is the tangible benefit of 'flashrom-stable', if it only removes
> features if it adds no new functionality, but only removes some?
> _______________________________________________
> Dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.parabola.nu/mailman/listinfo/dev

There is a bigger issue at play here:
flashrom has been taken over by a google employee - the use of rust is merely a
symptom, they're steering it in a direction suitable mostly only for use with
chromebooks and dropping off compatibility layers and code that it had for
multiple platforms.
Saying that they overlap is true, but it isn't a matter of flashrom being more
capable than flashrom-stable.
Flashrom-stable seems to have been currently evicted our of coreboot, it isn't
clear if Nico Huber is interested in fighting a battle with them on it.
Currently this whole thing exists in limbo - Leah Rowe of Libreboot has
expressed interest in carrying the development on in case Nico doesn't do
anything about it in a few months.
If anything, parabola should keep offering both in my opinion, but also keeping
an eye out on any changes in the situation, as flashrom might introduce non-free
parts.


-- 
Kind Regards,
Wael Karram, TeapotChat NetOP.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

_______________________________________________
Dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.parabola.nu/mailman/listinfo/dev

Reply via email to