Sorry for replying a bit late. The emailadres of my svn account is no longer valid, so I only notice it by going through the email on the list.
> Also, I'm used to placing firmware that I want installed into the > > hardware.firmware option, like this: > > > > hardware.firmware = [ pkgs.firmwareLinuxNonfree ]; > Sure. That's what I did in the beginning. The purpose of having a Boolean switch would just make it easier for an end-user to turn all available firmware of kernel.org on, as Eelco said: > Yeah, in general having options to enable a single package is not a good > idea. However I think it would be very useful to have an option > ‘hardware.enableAllFirmware’ (...Firmwares?) that enables all firmware > packages (including pkgs.firmwareLinuxNonfree). This would be very > useful on the installation CD and for users who want things to Just Work. > Feel of course free to rename any options or names that I chose :) For now, I simply took the name of the upstream package, but a more simple/general name would be preferable. I agree that on the one hand it is nicer to have individual packages for individual hardware. On the other hand, firmware doesn't really benefit from that. Note that the disk space used by the firmware binaries is negligible, and more importantly: firmware is only loaded when the kernel module that needs it passes its name to some API function. Thus, unused firmware will not even be read by the kernel. Also note that these firmwares belong to kernel modules that belong to a particular kernel version, so you better make sure that they are all of the same version. > P.S. I suggested to Arie that we should use the Debian firmware packages > in NixOS, since they've done the hard work of gathering all these > firmwares and keeping them up to date. These are: > > http://packages.debian.org/source/sid/firmware-nonfree > > and > > http://packages.debian.org/source/sid/firmware-free Yes. I first fetched them directly from a git repo from kernel.org, but that is problematic by itself. I'm now using the source distributions. Eelco also suggested taking the firmware from the binary packages. That will ultimately be a nicer solution because it seems that a small subset of the firmware is located wrongly in the source distribution and thus cannot be found by their respective modules.
_______________________________________________ nix-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
