Bug#1039872: Improve firmware package inclusion
On 05/07/2023 at 17:55, Steve McIntyre wrote: On Wed, Jul 05, 2023 at 08:30:03AM +0200, Pascal Hambourg wrote: As mentioned in #1032071, AFAICS firmware-ti-connectivity also contains ARM-only firmware. Hmmm, OK. The description isn't 100% clear here. Indeed. I came to this conclusion after checking that the modules mentioned in the description were present only in ARM kernel-image packages.
Bug#1039872: Improve firmware package inclusion
On Wed, Jul 05, 2023 at 08:30:03AM +0200, Pascal Hambourg wrote: >On 05/07/2023 at 00:50, Steve McIntyre wrote: >> >> I think that's quite a result! Comparing the ISOs, the differences are >> just 5 missing firmware debs: >> >> firmware-nvidia-gsp_525.116.04-1_amd64.deb >> firmware-nvidia-tesla-gsp_525.105.17-2_amd64.deb >> firmware-qcom-soc_20230515-2_all.deb >> firmware-samsung_20230515-2_all.deb >> raspi-firmware_1.20220830+ds-1_all.deb > >As mentioned in #1032071, AFAICS firmware-ti-connectivity also contains >ARM-only firmware. Hmmm, OK. The description isn't 100% clear here. I'll filter it now for non-arm as well. -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.st...@einval.com Mature Sporty Personal More Innovation More Adult A Man in Dandism Powered Midship Specialty
Bug#1039872: Improve firmware package inclusion
On 05/07/2023 at 00:50, Steve McIntyre wrote: I think that's quite a result! Comparing the ISOs, the differences are just 5 missing firmware debs: firmware-nvidia-gsp_525.116.04-1_amd64.deb firmware-nvidia-tesla-gsp_525.105.17-2_amd64.deb firmware-qcom-soc_20230515-2_all.deb firmware-samsung_20230515-2_all.deb raspi-firmware_1.20220830+ds-1_all.deb As mentioned in #1032071, AFAICS firmware-ti-connectivity also contains ARM-only firmware.
Bug#1039872: Improve firmware package inclusion
On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 06:17:49AM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote: >Package: debian-installer >Severity: normal > >As mentioned in #1038440 and elsewhere, some of our media builds are >too big and this is mostly due to inclusion of firmware packages. Some >growth is not unexpected, but we're including firmware packages that >are not useful, e.g.: > > * nvidia firmware packages from the nvidia-graphics-drivers* source > package are not useful without non-free drivers that we're not > shipping in our images > (https://lists.debian.org/debian-boot/2023/01/msg00157.html) > * we're currently including raspi-firmware for all arches, while it's > only useful for arm* > >I think we could really do with some extra metadata for the firmware >packages to help us determine what to include on media. Maybe: > > * "this firmware works/does not work with free drivers in Debian" > * "this is generic firmware, useful for all arches" > * "this firmware is useful for arches <> only" > >What other information would be helpful? > >In the meantime, I'm about to add support for firmware-ignore list(s) >in debian-cd. And I've just pushed that into unstable now - see commit 1824a6693304cd8923da288610c378b6b18ed62a . The difference is clear, comparing amd64 trixie netinst images: before: -rw-r--r-- 1 debian-cd debian-cd 788529152 Jul 4 15:14 sid_d-i/20230704-5/amd64/iso-cd/debian-testing-amd64-netinst.iso after: -rw-r--r-- 1 debian-cd debian-cd 673185792 Jul 4 17:05 sid_d-i/20230704-6/amd64/iso-cd/debian-testing-amd64-netinst.iso I think that's quite a result! Comparing the ISOs, the differences are just 5 missing firmware debs: firmware-nvidia-gsp_525.116.04-1_amd64.deb firmware-nvidia-tesla-gsp_525.105.17-2_amd64.deb firmware-qcom-soc_20230515-2_all.deb firmware-samsung_20230515-2_all.deb raspi-firmware_1.20220830+ds-1_all.deb -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.st...@einval.com Who needs computer imagery when you've got Brian Blessed?
Bug#1039872: Improve firmware package inclusion
Package: debian-installer Severity: normal As mentioned in #1038440 and elsewhere, some of our media builds are too big and this is mostly due to inclusion of firmware packages. Some growth is not unexpected, but we're including firmware packages that are not useful, e.g.: * nvidia firmware packages from the nvidia-graphics-drivers* source package are not useful without non-free drivers that we're not shipping in our images (https://lists.debian.org/debian-boot/2023/01/msg00157.html) * we're currently including raspi-firmware for all arches, while it's only useful for arm* I think we could really do with some extra metadata for the firmware packages to help us determine what to include on media. Maybe: * "this firmware works/does not work with free drivers in Debian" * "this is generic firmware, useful for all arches" * "this firmware is useful for arches <> only" What other information would be helpful? In the meantime, I'm about to add support for firmware-ignore list(s) in debian-cd. -- System Information: Debian Release: 11.7 APT prefers oldstable-updates APT policy: (500, 'oldstable-updates'), (500, 'oldstable-security'), (500, 'oldoldstable'), (500, 'oldstable') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Foreign Architectures: i386 Kernel: Linux 5.10.0-22-amd64 (SMP w/8 CPU threads) Kernel taint flags: TAINT_WARN, TAINT_OOT_MODULE, TAINT_UNSIGNED_MODULE Locale: LANG=en_GB.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8), LANGUAGE=en_GB:en Shell: /bin/sh linked to /usr/bin/dash Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system) LSM: AppArmor: enabled
