On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 09:40:24AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote: > >The problem is that the vendors for most devices that include the Intel >hardware require Intel signatures on the firmware binaries. > >Some devices (Intel based Chromebooks and UP boards) allow firmware >binaries to be signed by a "community" private key that is public. > >In the future Intel may enable a scenario similar to Secure Boot's >Machine Owner Key setup, where device owners can add new signing keys. > >https://github.com/thesofproject/sof/issues/5814 > >In that situation, Debian could sign the audio firmware binaries >instead and allow users to sign their own modified firmware binaries.
Yup, that would be a lovely big win! >> The free installer is ideal for virtualisation only because it's >> sitting on top of a bunch of idealised hardware. > >It could also be useful for devices that run libre firmware, such as >Raptor Computing's ppc64el devices, although Debian does not have >packages of the libre firmware projects for these devices so in >practice it isn't yet useful for those scenarios. Right. I'd prefer us not to get dragged down the "users just need to pick the right hardware" path. That way potentially lies a (slightly snobbish?) "you chose wrong, try harder" message that will just push users (and eventually developers) to other distros. There are always going to be machines that we can't/won't be able to support, but when the vast majority of current laptops don't function sensibly without non-free firmware I think we have to adapt to reality in supporting our users. -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK. st...@einval.com Welcome my son, welcome to the machine.
