Hi,
>Well, as said, the only correct way would be that the "hashcat" package >directly depends on NVidia drivers, AMD drivers or Intel drivers. > >But as far as I understood this can't be enforced because otherwise the >hashcat package can't be installed by default (and debian has the policy which >doesn't allow >non-free packages to be shipped by default). > >Yeah, it would make sense to have a dependency tree like this: >hashcat depends on hashcat-nvidia | hashcat-amd | hashcat-intel >hashcat-nvidia depends on [proprietary Nvidia driver], hashcat-base >hashcat-amd depends on [proprietary AMD driver], hashcat-base >hashcat-intel depends on [proprietary Intel driver], hashcat-base > >(where "|" means "or" and the [] denotes the correct drivers from nvidia.com, >support.amd.com and software.intel.com correspondingly). I tried to do something really similar to boinc, shipping cuda packages [1] unfortunately this approach is not scaling too much for: - Debian derivatives (they call graphical packages a little bit differently - Custom drivers (e.g. download from the official repo the .run binary and install it, no deb involved - ISO where you can't install all the drivers just because you can :p I would be very upset about the system forcing me to install a driver because it can't detect my custom-built downloaded one. [1] https://sources.debian.net/src/boinc/7.6.33%2Bdfsg-6exp1/debian/control/ (I know this is not applying completely to this bug report, but I wanted to give my .02$ about the topic) (runtime warnings are probably the best thing we can do at this point) cheers, G.
