On Wed, 2010-05-19 at 16:39 +0200, Thomas Bächler wrote: > Am 19.05.2010 16:19, schrieb Dan McGee: > > On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 6:10 AM, Thomas Bächler <thomas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> Am 19.05.2010 10:56, schrieb Evangelos Foutras: > >>> Also did a diff [1] between the file lists of kernel26-firmware-2.6.34-1 > >>> and linux-firmware-git-20100519-1. It shows that ralink firmware has > >>> indeed been added to the linux-firmware repository, which should resolve > >>> FS#19519 [2]. > >> > >> I did that too and noticed the same. It would also replace all intel > >> ucode packages, and some more I don't know about. However, it is > >> considerably bigger than kernel26-firmware (2MB vs. 12MB). > > > > How often does it need to be updated? We now (needlessly?) have the > > firmware package track the actual kernel package so it ends up getting > > re-downloaded a lot more often than probably necessary, so the above > > package, while large, would probably be updated less anyway (and would > > be an 'any' package?). > > Everytime someone complains about a firmware file missing. > > Seriously, look at the commit log, it only had 23 commits this year: > http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/dwmw2/linux-firmware.git;a=summary > > I guess we would upgrade it at most once a month. +1 for replacing all firmware packages included in this one. I don't care about the few extra megabytes on my system. This saves us uploading and downloading a binary firmware package on every kernel update, generates less packages in the repositories and moves kernel26-firmware to an arch=any package. The only disadvantage is the 10MB extra size, but the advantages are bigger than that.
