-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 11/02/13 05:27, Peter Stuge wrote:
I, as another user, prefer not to have a whole bunch of firmware
installed if I only want one or two of them.
+1. Also licences. It's a mess. Not suggesting that *I* have the
magic-unicorn-land-perfect
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 02/10/2013 11:27 PM, Peter Stuge wrote:
J. Roeleveld wrote:
I, as a user, prefer not to have to hunt for firmware for devices
supported vy the kernel. I would either install all of them or
filter out the firmwares for devices I am unlikely to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 02/11/2013 04:03 AM, Alexander Berntsen wrote:
On 11/02/13 05:27, Peter Stuge wrote:
I, as another user, prefer not to have a whole bunch of firmware
installed if I only want one or two of them.
+1. Also licences. It's a mess. Not suggesting
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org wrote:
Any objections if I slap a generic package.mask on every firmware package
installing to wrong directory?
Half of them install to /$(get_libdir)/firmware as opposed to correct
/lib/firmware.
Most of them are
J. Roeleveld wrote:
I, as a user, prefer not to have to hunt for firmware for devices
supported vy the kernel. I would either install all of them or
filter out the firmwares for devices I am unlikely to get.
I, as another user, prefer not to have a whole bunch of firmware
installed if I only
On Fri, 8 Feb 2013, Tomáš Chvátal wrote:
2013/2/8 Diego Elio Pettenò flamee...@flameeyes.eu:
I would say that we might want to review linux-firmware, and if the
newest firmware _is_ there, just get rid of the split one.
That should be probably the best approach, to actually kill of the
On 09/02/13 11:06, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
On Fri, 8 Feb 2013, Tomáš Chvátal wrote:
2013/2/8 Diego Elio Pettenò flamee...@flameeyes.eu:
I would say that we might want to review linux-firmware, and if the
newest firmware _is_ there, just get rid of the split one.
That should be probably the
Ulrich Mueller u...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Fri, 8 Feb 2013, Tomáš Chvátal wrote:
2013/2/8 Diego Elio Pettenò flamee...@flameeyes.eu:
I would say that we might want to review linux-firmware, and if the
newest firmware _is_ there, just get rid of the split one.
That should be probably the
On 09/02/13 11:11, J. Roeleveld wrote:
Ulrich Mueller u...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Fri, 8 Feb 2013, Tomáš Chvátal wrote:
2013/2/8 Diego Elio Pettenò flamee...@flameeyes.eu:
I would say that we might want to review linux-firmware, and if the
newest firmware _is_ there, just get rid of the
On Sat, 09 Feb 2013, Samuli Suominen wrote:
I disagree. Why should we force users to install lots of crap (some
of it being non-free) that they will never need because they don't
have the hardware?
Maybe you don't understand how linux-firmware package works. It only
installs what you want
Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 09/02/13 11:11, J. Roeleveld wrote:
Ulrich Mueller u...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Fri, 8 Feb 2013, Tomáš Chvátal wrote:
2013/2/8 Diego Elio Pettenò flamee...@flameeyes.eu:
I would say that we might want to review linux-firmware, and if
the
newest
On Sat, 09 Feb 2013 11:09:15 +0200
Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 09/02/13 11:06, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
On Fri, 8 Feb 2013, Tomáš Chvátal wrote:
2013/2/8 Diego Elio Pettenò flamee...@flameeyes.eu:
I would say that we might want to review linux-firmware, and if the
On Sat, 9 Feb 2013, Michał Górny wrote:
I don't think that solves the license problem properly. Say, if user
doesn't want non-free software, he's going to have the whole package
masked. He'd have to work-around license + savedconfig.
Now that I look at it, it seems that the ebuild doesn't
On 08/02/2013 18:53, Samuli Suominen wrote:
Then intrested parties get to fix what they want and unmask?
I would say that we might want to review linux-firmware, and if the
newest firmware _is_ there, just get rid of the split one.
--
Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes
flamee...@flameeyes.eu —
2013/2/8 Diego Elio Pettenò flamee...@flameeyes.eu:
On 08/02/2013 18:53, Samuli Suominen wrote:
Then intrested parties get to fix what they want and unmask?
I would say that we might want to review linux-firmware, and if the
newest firmware _is_ there, just get rid of the split one.
That
El vie, 08-02-2013 a las 19:01 +0100, Diego Elio Pettenò escribió:
On 08/02/2013 18:53, Samuli Suominen wrote:
Then intrested parties get to fix what they want and unmask?
I would say that we might want to review linux-firmware, and if the
newest firmware _is_ there, just get rid of the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 08/02/13 01:14 PM, Tomáš Chvátal wrote:
2013/2/8 Diego Elio Pettenò flamee...@flameeyes.eu:
On 08/02/2013 18:53, Samuli Suominen wrote:
Then intrested parties get to fix what they want and unmask?
I would say that we might want to review
17 matches
Mail list logo
