Thanks Jonathan,
On 07/12/2020 10:15, Jonathan Carter wrote:
Hi Mark
On 2020/12/07 15:57, Mark Pearson wrote:
I did a bit of reading this weekend, and started the process. Having
created appropriate files under a debian sub-dir, and messed around a
bit, now when running 'debuild -us -uc' from
On 2020/12/07 18:07, Mark Pearson wrote:
> I pushed what I have to https://salsa.debian.org/mpearson/sof-bin-packaging
>
> It's pretty basic :)
Seems like you haven't committed go.sh? (and hopefully more files?)
-Jonathan
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Jonathan Carter (highvoltage)
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ https://wiki.deb
On 07/12/2020 11:13, Jonathan Carter wrote:
On 2020/12/07 18:07, Mark Pearson wrote:
I pushed what I have to https://salsa.debian.org/mpearson/sof-bin-packaging
It's pretty basic :)
Seems like you haven't committed go.sh? (and hopefully more files?)
-Jonathan
They're all in the upstream
Thanks Vincent,
On 07/12/2020 09:03, Vincent Bernat wrote:
❦ 7 décembre 2020 08:57 -05, Mark Pearson:
I'd like to solve the lack of Intel SOF audio firmware & topology
files being available on Debian - I know it's impacting a lot of users
on some of the newer Thinkpads. I figured I should h
Thanks Paul,
On 07/12/2020 21:19, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 7, 2020 at 1:58 PM Mark Pearson wrote:
>
>> I'd like to solve the lack of Intel SOF audio firmware
>
> IIRC the Debian kernel team were planning on adding those to the
> linux-firmware.git packaging.
>
If that is happening that so
Quoting Mark Pearson (2020-12-08 04:18:20)
> On 07/12/2020 21:19, Paul Wise wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 7, 2020 at 1:58 PM Mark Pearson wrote:
> >
> >> I'd like to solve the lack of Intel SOF audio firmware
> >
> > IIRC the Debian kernel team were planning on adding those to the
> > linux-firmware.git
Hello,
On Tue, 8 Dec 2020 at 09:47, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
>
> Quoting Mark Pearson (2020-12-08 04:18:20)
> > On 07/12/2020 21:19, Paul Wise wrote:
> > > On Mon, Dec 7, 2020 at 1:58 PM Mark Pearson wrote:
> > >
> > >> I'd like to solve the lack of Intel SOF audio firmware
> > >
> > > IIRC the De
> firmware could also be built but dependencies would be hard to
> package/maintain - as I understood - those need a forked xtensa
> compiler.
I'm adopting the firmware-ath9k-htc package at the moment, which also uses a
forked xtensa compiler and is built from source. Rather than package the
cus
On 08/12/2020 04:43, Hector Oron wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Tue, 8 Dec 2020 at 09:47, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
>>
>> Quoting Mark Pearson (2020-12-08 04:18:20)
>>> On 07/12/2020 21:19, Paul Wise wrote:
On Mon, Dec 7, 2020 at 1:58 PM Mark Pearson wrote:
> I'd like to solve the lack of Int
Hello,
El dt., 8 de des. 2020, 16:04, Mark Pearson va
escriure:
> > I studied the different options time ago, Fedora ships it's own
> > separate package, Ubuntu merges it into firmware-linux-nonfree,
> > firmware could also be built but dependencies would be hard to
> > package/maintain - as I u
On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 3:04 PM Mark Pearson wrote:
> From my point of view (admittedly limited) there is limited benefit to
> building your own unsigned firmware as it won't load on our systems.
According the discussion I had with Lenovo and Intel folks, Intel
Baytrail/Cherrytrail/Broadwell syste
Hi Paul,
On 08/12/2020 21:16, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 3:04 PM Mark Pearson wrote:
>
>> From my point of view (admittedly limited) there is limited benefit to
>> building your own unsigned firmware as it won't load on our systems.
>
> According the discussion I had with Lenovo a
So a big thank you to all who responded with suggestions and advice.
Particularly thanks to Stephan Lachnit and Vincent Bernat for providing
fixes and improvements directly to my first attempt.
I've taken most of what they gave (not all - some pieces still in
progress) and have a second attempt up
❦ 10 décembre 2020 12:57 -05, Mark Pearson:
> I did have to comment out "overlay = True" in the gbp.conf - it gave me
> an error that I'll have to dig into.
That's because you went for the first "classic" solution. I was pushing
for the overlay solution as the upstream git repository is pushing
Hi Vincent
On 10/12/2020 13:53, Vincent Bernat wrote:
> ❦ 10 décembre 2020 12:57 -05, Mark Pearson:
>
>> I did have to comment out "overlay = True" in the gbp.conf - it gave me
>> an error that I'll have to dig into.
>
> That's because you went for the first "classic" solution. I was pushing
>
owner 960788 markpear...@lenovo.com
quit
❦ 11 décembre 2020 12:15 -05, Mark Pearson:
>>> I did have to comment out "overlay = True" in the gbp.conf - it gave me
>>> an error that I'll have to dig into.
>>
>> That's because you went for the first "classic" solution. I was pushing
>> for the over
Thanks Vincent
On 11/12/2020 14:22, Vincent Bernat wrote:
> owner 960788 markpear...@lenovo.com
> quit
>
> ❦ 11 décembre 2020 12:15 -05, Mark Pearson:
>
>>>
>>> This should do the trick. You may want to tag the upstream commit
>>> yourself with upstream/1.6 if you upstream is not consistent w
❦ 11 décembre 2020 20:36 -05, Mark Pearson:
>> They seem to say future releases will be tagged. So, I think you should
>> use in gbp.conf:
>>
>> upstream-tag = v%(version%~%-)s
>> pristine-tar = False
>>
>> No need for upstream-branch since you won't use "gbp import-orig" as the
>> origin lives
On 12/12/2020 05:48, Vincent Bernat wrote:
> ❦ 11 décembre 2020 20:36 -05, Mark Pearson:
>
> You need to use "~rc" instead of "-rc", otherwise, users won't be able
> to upgrade to "1.6" when they have "1.6-rc3" installed.
>
Ooops - my bad. I started wearing glasses this year...but don't always
p
19 matches
Mail list logo