On Fri, 2022-12-16 at 18:12 +0100, B.M. wrote: > Hi, > > The new laptop just arrived and I had a first look what the people > did > at Dell or Canonical: > > After switching it on the first time, I was asked to enter > / configure > WLAN, username, password, hostname, keyboard layout, time zone. It > also > let me create a recovery USB stick. After a reboot I now could just > use > it. But of course I had a look behind the scenes...: > > It came with Ubuntu 20.04.4 LTS and Gnome 3.36.8 running on X11. > > The internal disk is formatted as > - 891 MB EFI mounted at /boot/efi > - 8.6 GB FAT not mounted, disks reports it as "Microsoft Reserved" > - 503 GB Ext4 Root Partition > > The USB stick I used as recovery medium got formatted as > - 4 GB 0x00 (Bootable) ISO 9660 mounted at > /media/<username>/DellRecoveryMedia > - 4.1 MB EFI FAT not mounted > - and some GB free space > > After installing Synaptic I found out that there are some more > Origins > with installed packages as listed here: > local/main (dell.archive.canonical.com): > oem-fix-misc-cnl-tlp-estar-conf, 5.0.3.4, maintainer > commercial.engineering(at)canonical.com: > This package carrys agressive policy to pass energy-star, and > also > some blacklist for problematic devices > oem-somerville-factory-meta, 20.04ubuntu9, maintainer > commercial.engineering(at)canonical.com: > It installs packages needed to support this hardware fully. > oem-somerville-factory-paras-35-meta, 20.04ubuntu3, maintainer > commercial.engineering(at)canonical.com: > It installs packages needed to support this hardware fully. > (factory) > oem-somerville-meta, 20.04ubuntu9, maintainer > commercial.engineering(at)canonical.com: > This is a metapackage for Somerville platform. It installs > packages > needed to support this hardware fully. > oem-somerville-paras-35-meta, 20.04ubuntu3, maintainer > commercial.engineering(at)canonical.com: > This is a metapackage for Somerville Paras-35 platform. It > installs > packages needed to support this hardware fully. > oem-somerville-partner-archive-keyring, 20.04ubuntu2, maintainer > commercial.engineering(at)canonical.com: > Somerville project keyring. > local/universe (dell.archive.canonical.com): > tlp, 1.3.1-2, maintainer ubuntu-devel-discuss(at)lists.ubuntu.com: > Save battery power on laptops > (Description) > tlp-rdw, 1.3.1-2, maintainer ubuntu-devel- > discuss(at)lists.ubuntu.com: > Radio device wizard > (Description) > focal/universe (dell.archive.canonical.com): > tlp, 1.3.1-2, maintainer ubuntu-devel-discuss(at)lists.ubuntu.com: > tlp-rdw, 1.3.1-2, maintainer ubuntu-devel- > discuss(at)lists.ubuntu.com: > stable/main (dl.google.com): > google-chrome-stable is installed > > Now my thoughts are: > - Chrome not necessary... > - tlp, tlp-rdw: also in Debian Testing (Bookworm), but with higher > version number (1.5.0-1), but also with a different maintainer > (raphael.hal...@gmail.com) > oem-fix-misc-cnl-tlp-estar-conf: does it make sense to keep this > package? > oem-somerville-*: could make sense to keep... > > --> Can I re-install these packages after installing Debian Testing > by > adding and enabling these Dell repositories? > > Under /etc/apt/trusted.gpg.d/ there are some files that might be > corresponding to these repos and maybe I should keep them: > ubuntu-keyring-2008-oem.gpg > ubuntu-keyring-2008-oem.key.gpg > ubuntu-keyring-2020-oem.gpg > > and under /etc/apt/sources.list.d/ there are: > focal-oem.list > oem-somerville-paras-35-meta.list > > But: as far as I remember, one should not mix Debian packages /repos > with Ubuntu packages / repos, but I might work. > > What do you think? > > (Of course I could just keep it as it is, but I'd prefer having a > Debian-only setup in our family across all devices.) > > (Fun fact also mentioned: on the Dell website for the laptop there is > a > Q&A section where is stated that the laptop comes without any OS pre- > installed but one could install Ubuntu on it while when asking their > chat the answer was that it's not allowed to sell computers without > any > OS installed (at least here in Switzerland)...) > > Have a nice day, > Bernd > > > PS: Please add me CC since I'm currently not subscribed to this list. > Thanks. >
Hi again, Looking a bit further, it seems that all these packages are not containing more than 3 config files within /etc/tlp.d/ And the tlp and tlp-rdw packages itself. Does someone have an idea what it means that these packages have higher version numbers in Debian Testing but a different maintainer (see my last mail)? Going back in the Debian changelog file there hasn't been a change in the maintainer, i.e. I have to assume that the packages are not identical? Should/could I compare their config files? Thank you and have a nice day, Bernd