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 > >>> newest firmware _is_ there, just get rid of the split one. > >>> > >> That should be probably the best approach, to actually kill of the > >> lone ones and keep the linux-firmware only. > > > > 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? > > > > Ulrich > > > > Maybe you don't understand how linux-firmware package works. It only > installs what you want -- it uses the savedconfig eclass to handle a > list of wanted firmwares. > > I admit I never bothered to trim down my install of it, but the point is > YOU CAN do it. 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 even put all necessary licenses into LICENSE. I may be wrong but the git repo seems to have a lot of non-standard licenses. -- Best regards, Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
