Hi Mario,
first of all thanks for your pointers!
On 27/12/2018 20:28, mario.limoncie...@dell.com wrote:
Just the fact that the update claims that the hardware only accepts
signed updates or something else? :)
At a minimum a claim.
I will note - although slightly off-topic to the discussion
> Just the fact that the update claims that the hardware only accepts
> signed updates or something else? :)
At a minimum a claim.
> I will note - although slightly off-topic to the discussion at hand -
> that it would be useful to people to be able to run their own repository
> of updates and
Hey Mario,
On 2018-12-27 03:52, mario.limoncie...@dell.com wrote:
Something I think worth mentioning is that LVFS is being transitioned
to being run
and managed by the Linux Foundation.
yeah, that's great news.
Interestingly enough the vendor signs a blob (CAB file) and LVFS
throws
it away
Something I think worth mentioning is that LVFS is being transitioned to being
run
and managed by the Linux Foundation.
>Interestingly enough the vendor signs a blob (CAB file) and LVFS throws
> it away and re-signs the blob with its own key. But then again I think
> the base assumption is that
On 26/12/2018 22:32, Steve McIntyre wrote:
On Wed, Dec 26, 2018 at 10:27:35PM +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
Steve McIntyre (2018-12-26):
Philipp Kern (2018-12-26):
I'm not sure, though, if there is some philosophical objection here in
that fwupd downloads non-free blobs and/or that Debian
On Wed, Dec 26, 2018 at 3:09 PM Philipp Kern wrote:
> I'd have another - and I hope stronger - argument to upgrade the
> dependency from suggests to recommends: gnome-software is actually
> displaying an error when fwupd is not present on the bus (see attached
> screenshot).
I believe I was the
On Wed, 2018-12-26 at 21:32 +, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 26, 2018 at 10:27:35PM +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> > Steve McIntyre (2018-12-26):
> > > > Philipp Kern (2018-12-26):
> > > > > I'm not sure, though, if there is some philosophical
> > > > > objection here in
> > > > >
On Wed, Dec 26, 2018 at 10:27:35PM +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
>Steve McIntyre (2018-12-26):
>> >Philipp Kern (2018-12-26):
>> >> I'm not sure, though, if there is some philosophical objection here in
>> >> that fwupd downloads non-free blobs and/or that Debian does not actually
>> >> ship the
Steve McIntyre (2018-12-26):
> >Philipp Kern (2018-12-26):
> >> I'm not sure, though, if there is some philosophical objection here in
> >> that fwupd downloads non-free blobs and/or that Debian does not actually
> >> ship the blobs themselves.
> >
> >FWIW both parts seem unacceptable to me,
On Wed, Dec 26, 2018 at 09:48:15PM +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
>Hi,
>
>Philipp Kern (2018-12-26):
>> I'm not sure, though, if there is some philosophical objection here in
>> that fwupd downloads non-free blobs and/or that Debian does not actually
>> ship the blobs themselves.
>
>FWIW both
Hi,
Philipp Kern (2018-12-26):
> I'm not sure, though, if there is some philosophical objection here in
> that fwupd downloads non-free blobs and/or that Debian does not actually
> ship the blobs themselves.
FWIW both parts seem unacceptable to me, esp. in a default installation.
Cheers,
--
severity 916036 normal
thanks
Hi,
I'd have another - and I hope stronger - argument to upgrade the
dependency from suggests to recommends: gnome-software is actually
displaying an error when fwupd is not present on the bus (see attached
screenshot).
But yes, I also second that we really
12 matches
Mail list logo
