• Moving netboot debian-installer binaries out of main?

    From Sam Hartman@21:1/5 to All on Wed Oct 5 22:00:01 2022
    XPost: linux.debian.maint.boot

    "Steve" == Steve McIntyre <steve@einval.com> writes:

    Steve> Hi all! [ I've also blogged about this - see
    Steve> https://blog.einval.com/2022/10/02#firmware-vote-result ]

    Steve> I'm assuming that there will be no surprises and Kurt will
    Steve> shortly confirm the result that devotee reported already
    Steve> [1]. :-)

    Steve> We have quite a few things to do now, ideally before the
    Steve> freeze for Debian 12 (bookworm), due January 2023 [2]. This
    Steve> list of work items is almost definitely not complete, and
    Steve> Cyril and I are aiming to get together this week and do more
    Steve> detailed planning for the d-i pieces. Off the top of my head
    Steve> I can think of the following:

    Steve> If you think I've missed anything here, please let me and
    Steve> Cyril know - the best place would be the mailing list
    Steve> (debian-boot@lists.debian.org). If you'd like to help
    Steve> implement any of these changes, that would be lovely too!

    So, for each architecture there are packages in main like debian-installer-12-netboot-archname

    I'm assuming the plan is to include firmeware into the initrds for these images.
    As an example, you'd probably want GPU firmware in the gtk images and
    probably want sound firmware:-)
    Also, presumably any network firmware.

    We revised the social contract by adding:
    The Debian official media may include firmware that is otherwise not
    part of the Debian system to enable use of Debian with hardware that
    requires such firmware.



    So, the official installer images can include the firmware.

    But as far as I can tell we did not either

    1) revise the DFSG

    or 2) revise the definition of the main section of the archive.

    So at least in my reading, these binary packages will no longer qualify
    for the main section of the archive.

    I think that technically this is probably not a big deal, unless we get
    into a situation where for example we decide we want a source package in
    main building binaries in wherever we decide to move these netboot
    images.

    Also, I guess there's a question of whether we move the images to
    non-free or non-free-firmware.
    Presumably non-free-firmware would make them more available.

    --Sam

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

    iHUEARYIAB0WIQSj2jRwbAdKzGY/4uAsbEw8qDeGdAUCYz3hXgAKCRAsbEw8qDeG dJPOAQCHfyrstl9Msu7WfP1rl6FCaX9E0/tntRspYIFvW3V9gQEAhswM1LULcJcW MZWoFMgvfdWjK4JdaGkFYIXmwhp7SAI=
    =OYLT
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)