On Sun, 07 Jul 2024 08:44:33 -0000 "Mattia Verga" <mattia.verga@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I'm currently packaging indi-3rdparty-libraries by stripping out sources from binary SDKs provided upstream. > That means only a few devices are actually supported to work in Fedora. > > I'm now getting interest in adding support for some cameras I'm about to buy, probably from Player One. Fedora Packaging Guidelines says it's ok to have binary firmware packages when this is required to have hardware function properly. indi-3rdparty includes [1] the Player One SDK to make those cameras work. > > Now, I'm a bit confused: are those SDK binary files considered as firmware to make hardware function properly? The license under which they are distributed is MIT, so it would be ok... I don't think a library that's used on the host for linking into apps can be considered as firmware. Usually a firmware is a blob that has no direct use on the host and is loaded into some device instead. Also the libplayerone SDK license doesn't allow distribution, it only allows "use" :-( Dan > [1] https://github.com/indilib/indi-3rdparty/tree/master/libplayerone -- _______________________________________________ packaging mailing list -- packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to packaging-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/packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
