On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 7:35 PM Richard Hughes <hughsient@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, 25 Aug 2023 at 19:26, Marcus Müller <marcus@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I fully agree with that assessment. "Here's a knob you turn that has the potential to make > > your firmware update 2s faster and is generally good for the ecosystem, but you will have > > set it on every machine you set up" will not lead to significant deployment. > > Agree. > > > Question: I presume you only want to share the metadata, and never downloaded fw images, > > right? > > I think for phase 1 that's completely correct. > > > If that's the case, it'd alleviate a lot of the privacy concerns I'd have with my > > laptop sharing with a campus network all of the devices for which I've lately downloaded > > firmware. > > There are concerns with sharing firmware, I totally agree. It's > non-free software (which you have permission to redistribute, but > still unpalatable for many) -- the compromise I've done for people > changing the default to "metadata,firmware" is that you need to reboot > into the new firmware before the published firmware gets shared; on > the logic that you don't want to advertise to the world that you're > currently running insecure firmware. In a lot of corporate datacentre networks the "users" on the network would know what the network is comprised of, and often on these networks they will have 10s, 100s of even 1000s of identical devices where being able to do sharing of the same firmware is useful. Maybe make that configurable so the network/system admin can make the decision for what's best for their usecase? > > Can I suggest we make this at most a "Recommends:" dependence for fwupd in any case, so > > that one might uninstall passim without disabling fwupd? > > Yes, that's what I have right now. I do need to split out a > passim-libs so that you can remove the daemon and just leave the tiny > client library. > > > I'd actually love if I knew of a way my fedora containers could automagically find > > local package and metadata sources. Knowing that "change dnf to pull data from > > mDNS-announced sources *by default*" is a big change, flying the fwupd balloon first seems > > very attractive to me. > > Yup, totally agree. I think it's a nice self contained test that if > successful we could extend out to DNF metadata and other container-y > stuff. > > Richard. > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
