<r0ni>
so i've put up a temp repo where i'm testing things https://lngn.net/crux/rpi5/ i've added firmware ports there and latest kernels (which i've now split into two packages), but i'm curious about the stance of the distro on providing proprietary firmwares, especially with the stance of stripping docs, etc... should I include the license? or should they not be added to the official repo?
<pitillo>
that's a good question... I'm not sure about it
<pitillo>
what other distro do with that kind of packages? do they provide that packages? do they add licenses?
<r0ni>
without them afaik you have no wifi/bt support as the ones in the official linux-firmware package don't appear to work
<r0ni>
the ports themselves are re-packed deb files
<r0ni>
debian ships the license with it
<r0ni>
thats all legally required to do, but currently i'm stripping that content
<pitillo>
so may be with that licenses should be enought
<pitillo>
don't strip it... you manage the port, so that shouldn't be difficult to be maintained just to avoid legal problems
<r0ni>
fair enough, i'll ensure to include them in the official repo
<jaeger>
I suspect you have to include the license somewhere... not sure if it's fine to put in the port or a README vs. the package, as long as it's on the system?
<jaeger>
I'm certainly no expert
<r0ni>
do you think its worth having both 6.6 and 6.1 kernels?
<r0ni>
jaeger ya i was wondering if i could get away with it just being the README in the port myself
<r0ni>
leaving in port dir would be my preferred option
<r0ni>
since we dont ship packages anyway, it would not be necessary to include in a package
<r0ni>
i seriously doubt anyone would come knocking... but this IS broadcom
<pitillo>
if you don't provide packages... there is no problem
<pitillo>
the port automates downloading and building.... you are getting the license with the source... if it's stripped or not... I'm not sure if it affects
<r0ni>
right, pulling down the port tree gets the license and its on the local machine where installed in the end, so i'm assuming that would suffice
<r0ni>
i still need to look into the linux-firmware package, as it would likely overwrite the files needed, which could be a pain point for users
<pitillo>
I thought you were speaking about packages
<r0ni>
well when someone installs 'linux-firmware' the resulting package would either fail to install or require a --force to do so which would then overright the req firmware files