Paul, > I was mainly talking about the devices that can be found in this file: > > /lib/udev/rules.d/90-fwupd-devices.rules > > Those are a static set of devices not determined at runtime. > I guess for those, prompting the user to install fwupd is a good idea. >
On the contrary, I would disagree here. Those devices just show information about the current firmware on the device from udev. Prompting the user to install fwupd just to see this information seems like a giant waste of time. The really valuable ones are the ones that you can actually perform an update for. > > If fwupd can be included by default in Debian I think a better experience > can > > be had though. > > For proprietary platforms that seems like a reasonable idea but for > fairly open platforms like ARM/etc, I would much prefer all firmware to > be packaged for Debian and flashed using flash-kernel or similar. Actually ARM platforms I think make a lot of sense too. Fwupd can perform updates for USB type devices (DFU & Colorhug) that can both be used with ARM platforms. It also has specific support for Raspberry Pi FW: https://github.com/hughsie/fwupd/blob/master/src/fu-provider-rpi.c > > > So for now I think it would be better for isenkram to do one of these: > > 1) Query fwupd for updatable objects if it's installed. > > That sounds like a good idea, could you file a bug with the details? > I am not aware how that should work. Actually in looking closer at this, this doesn't really make sense given what isenkram does. It duplicates effort from what gnome-software already does with fwupd.
