On 10/2/22 22:02, Russ Allbery wrote:
Michael Biebl <biebl@debian.org> writes:The main difference is, that the renaming caused an error message by apt, so you knew something needed to be fixed.One could argue that having non-free but not non-free-firmware is sufficiently strange that it would be worth a suppressable apt warning (that you could turn off in apt.conf). I have no idea how easy that would be to implement, though.
Hi!I would very much prefer having this implemented in the base_files package. This is *the* package that follows releases, so that's IMO the best location.
I would hate having to use an upgrade program like in Ubuntu. :/ An easy check could be: 1/ are we upgrading from base-files << 12.3 (we're currently at 12.2 in Sid) AND 2/ is there the non-free repo installed in the default sources.list AND 3/ non-free-firmware repo isn't installed THEN warn user with debconf.Checking the configuration of a non-free and non-free-firmware is kind of hard, because just reading/parsing source.list and source.list.d that could be filled with non-debian repos can be quite hard. Though we could imagine tricks, like where both repo would include a special package present only for that test, and we just see if it is available with apt-cache policy for example (this is just an idea... not sure if there's better options).
Eventually, and propose automatically adding the n-f-f repo, if some of you really want to, but I'd prefer if at least this could be the non-default debconf answer (because on non-interactive setup, without access to internet (only to a local mirror), this could really mess things up).
Your thoughts everyone? Cheers, Thomas Goirand (zigo)P.S: I'm unfortunately *not* volunteering for implementing the above as I wont have enough time to do it properly, though I just hope my above suggestion helps...