[Kernel-packages] [Bug 1738272] Re: microcode packages, like firmware packages, should be in main
Override component to main firmware-sof 2.1.1-1ubuntu1 in kinetic: restricted/misc -> main firmware-sof-signed 2.1.1-1ubuntu1 in kinetic amd64: restricted/kernel/optional/100% -> main firmware-sof-signed 2.1.1-1ubuntu1 in kinetic arm64: restricted/kernel/optional/100% -> main firmware-sof-signed 2.1.1-1ubuntu1 in kinetic armhf: restricted/kernel/optional/100% -> main firmware-sof-signed 2.1.1-1ubuntu1 in kinetic i386: restricted/kernel/optional/100% -> main firmware-sof-signed 2.1.1-1ubuntu1 in kinetic ppc64el: restricted/kernel/optional/100% -> main firmware-sof-signed 2.1.1-1ubuntu1 in kinetic riscv64: restricted/kernel/optional/100% -> main firmware-sof-signed 2.1.1-1ubuntu1 in kinetic s390x: restricted/kernel/optional/100% -> main 8 publications overridden. ** Changed in: firmware-sof (Ubuntu) Status: New => Fix Released -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kernel Packages, which is subscribed to firmware-sof in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1738272 Title: microcode packages, like firmware packages, should be in main Status in firmware-sof package in Ubuntu: Fix Released Status in intel-microcode package in Ubuntu: Fix Released Status in iucode-tool package in Ubuntu: Fix Released Bug description: The MIR for intel-microcode and iucode-tool in LP: #139 requested that these packages be shipped in restricted. The iucode-tool package is free software, and is shipped in restricted only because of the circular recommends with intel-microcode. The intel-microcode package contains non-free software (free redistribution, but no source code). However, this code is not part of the OS; it runs /under/ the OS on the CPU, and is analogous to linux-firmware, which we do include in main. The question of suitability for restricted vs. main in Ubuntu was not examined as part of the previous MIR, and the security team signed off on it for "restricted or main as appropriate"; so I think the decision to put it in restricted was not based on a thorough examination of the facts by an archive admin, and does not represent a precedent that needs to be examined further. I believe that these two packages should be promoted to main for consistency. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/firmware-sof/+bug/1738272/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kernel-packages Post to : kernel-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kernel-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Kernel-packages] [Bug 1738272] Re: microcode packages, like firmware packages, should be in main
By the way, Debian created a new component, non-free-firmware, last month. I don't believe any Debian packages have switched to it yet. Based on this bug history, I'm guessing we'd want to automatically import those packages to universe then (or main where we want it part of our Canonical-supported set). -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kernel Packages, which is subscribed to firmware-sof in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1738272 Title: microcode packages, like firmware packages, should be in main Status in firmware-sof package in Ubuntu: New Status in intel-microcode package in Ubuntu: Fix Released Status in iucode-tool package in Ubuntu: Fix Released Bug description: The MIR for intel-microcode and iucode-tool in LP: #139 requested that these packages be shipped in restricted. The iucode-tool package is free software, and is shipped in restricted only because of the circular recommends with intel-microcode. The intel-microcode package contains non-free software (free redistribution, but no source code). However, this code is not part of the OS; it runs /under/ the OS on the CPU, and is analogous to linux-firmware, which we do include in main. The question of suitability for restricted vs. main in Ubuntu was not examined as part of the previous MIR, and the security team signed off on it for "restricted or main as appropriate"; so I think the decision to put it in restricted was not based on a thorough examination of the facts by an archive admin, and does not represent a precedent that needs to be examined further. I believe that these two packages should be promoted to main for consistency. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/firmware-sof/+bug/1738272/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kernel-packages Post to : kernel-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kernel-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Kernel-packages] [Bug 1738272] Re: microcode packages, like firmware packages, should be in main
The Kernel Packages team already owns the firmware-sof package. Ubuntu Package Archive Administrators, please promote the package to the main component in Ubuntu 22.04 and Kinetic. ** Changed in: firmware-sof (Ubuntu) Status: Incomplete => New -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kernel Packages, which is subscribed to firmware-sof in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1738272 Title: microcode packages, like firmware packages, should be in main Status in firmware-sof package in Ubuntu: New Status in intel-microcode package in Ubuntu: Fix Released Status in iucode-tool package in Ubuntu: Fix Released Bug description: The MIR for intel-microcode and iucode-tool in LP: #139 requested that these packages be shipped in restricted. The iucode-tool package is free software, and is shipped in restricted only because of the circular recommends with intel-microcode. The intel-microcode package contains non-free software (free redistribution, but no source code). However, this code is not part of the OS; it runs /under/ the OS on the CPU, and is analogous to linux-firmware, which we do include in main. The question of suitability for restricted vs. main in Ubuntu was not examined as part of the previous MIR, and the security team signed off on it for "restricted or main as appropriate"; so I think the decision to put it in restricted was not based on a thorough examination of the facts by an archive admin, and does not represent a precedent that needs to be examined further. I believe that these two packages should be promoted to main for consistency. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/firmware-sof/+bug/1738272/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kernel-packages Post to : kernel-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kernel-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Kernel-packages] [Bug 1738272] Re: microcode packages, like firmware packages, should be in main
yes, component-mismatches doesn't report on main/restricted or universe/multiverse mismatches. It sounds like we are still waiting for kernel team ack for owning the package? -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kernel Packages, which is subscribed to firmware-sof in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1738272 Title: microcode packages, like firmware packages, should be in main Status in firmware-sof package in Ubuntu: Incomplete Status in intel-microcode package in Ubuntu: Fix Released Status in iucode-tool package in Ubuntu: Fix Released Bug description: The MIR for intel-microcode and iucode-tool in LP: #139 requested that these packages be shipped in restricted. The iucode-tool package is free software, and is shipped in restricted only because of the circular recommends with intel-microcode. The intel-microcode package contains non-free software (free redistribution, but no source code). However, this code is not part of the OS; it runs /under/ the OS on the CPU, and is analogous to linux-firmware, which we do include in main. The question of suitability for restricted vs. main in Ubuntu was not examined as part of the previous MIR, and the security team signed off on it for "restricted or main as appropriate"; so I think the decision to put it in restricted was not based on a thorough examination of the facts by an archive admin, and does not represent a precedent that needs to be examined further. I believe that these two packages should be promoted to main for consistency. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/firmware-sof/+bug/1738272/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kernel-packages Post to : kernel-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kernel-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Kernel-packages] [Bug 1738272] Re: microcode packages, like firmware packages, should be in main
The dependency change is already done: linux-firmware recommends firmware-sof-signed, that is built by the firmware-sof source package. Please promote the firmware-sof source package (currently in restricted) to main. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kernel Packages, which is subscribed to firmware-sof in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1738272 Title: microcode packages, like firmware packages, should be in main Status in firmware-sof package in Ubuntu: Incomplete Status in intel-microcode package in Ubuntu: Fix Released Status in iucode-tool package in Ubuntu: Fix Released Bug description: The MIR for intel-microcode and iucode-tool in LP: #139 requested that these packages be shipped in restricted. The iucode-tool package is free software, and is shipped in restricted only because of the circular recommends with intel-microcode. The intel-microcode package contains non-free software (free redistribution, but no source code). However, this code is not part of the OS; it runs /under/ the OS on the CPU, and is analogous to linux-firmware, which we do include in main. The question of suitability for restricted vs. main in Ubuntu was not examined as part of the previous MIR, and the security team signed off on it for "restricted or main as appropriate"; so I think the decision to put it in restricted was not based on a thorough examination of the facts by an archive admin, and does not represent a precedent that needs to be examined further. I believe that these two packages should be promoted to main for consistency. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/firmware-sof/+bug/1738272/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kernel-packages Post to : kernel-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kernel-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Kernel-packages] [Bug 1738272] Re: microcode packages, like firmware packages, should be in main
FYI There was a request on IRC to also promote firmware-sof Moving that here to have an auditable trail why things were changed - also I guess we'd want to have an explicit ack by the kernel team that this is the very same case. >From #ubuntu-release [11:53] ubuntu-archive: Please move the firmware-sof source package to main to be consistent with linux-firmware. See bug [11:53] See bug 1738272 Even if all other special firmware cases apply this still would need an owning team. http://reqorts.qa.ubuntu.com/reports/m-r-package-team-mapping.html lists kernel-packages as the owner, so that aspect should be fine indeed. @Kernel Team - or most likely @apw - do you agree and want this promoted as maintained by the kernel team? @Luis: This isn't listed in https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/component-mismatches-proposed.html so there would need to be a dependency or seed change to hold it in main. Do you know (if not coordinate with the kernel team please) where this will be done before being promoted? [Without that it would again fall out of main in the next few hours after promotion] ** Also affects: firmware-sof (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided Status: New ** Changed in: firmware-sof (Ubuntu) Status: New => Incomplete ** Changed in: firmware-sof (Ubuntu) Assignee: (unassigned) => Andy Whitcroft (apw) -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kernel Packages, which is subscribed to firmware-sof in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1738272 Title: microcode packages, like firmware packages, should be in main Status in firmware-sof package in Ubuntu: Incomplete Status in intel-microcode package in Ubuntu: Fix Released Status in iucode-tool package in Ubuntu: Fix Released Bug description: The MIR for intel-microcode and iucode-tool in LP: #139 requested that these packages be shipped in restricted. The iucode-tool package is free software, and is shipped in restricted only because of the circular recommends with intel-microcode. The intel-microcode package contains non-free software (free redistribution, but no source code). However, this code is not part of the OS; it runs /under/ the OS on the CPU, and is analogous to linux-firmware, which we do include in main. The question of suitability for restricted vs. main in Ubuntu was not examined as part of the previous MIR, and the security team signed off on it for "restricted or main as appropriate"; so I think the decision to put it in restricted was not based on a thorough examination of the facts by an archive admin, and does not represent a precedent that needs to be examined further. I believe that these two packages should be promoted to main for consistency. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/firmware-sof/+bug/1738272/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kernel-packages Post to : kernel-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kernel-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
