[elrepo] packaging firmware ar3k

[Leon Fauster]

Hi Phil,

Am 01.04.2014 um 18:23 schrieb Phil Perry <phil at elrepo.org>:
> I backported the ath3k bluetooth driver from kernel-3.10 for el6, and as part of that
> I also packaged the firmware for it (above), ath3k-firmware.

oh - i didn't see that one. i tested it under kernel 2.6.32 and it works (without ar3k files), 
for other reasons I will use a 3.x kernel to get more hw support on this machine (trackpad etc.)



>> dmesg is still showing the "file not found ar3k/AthrBT_0x11020000.dfu" output.
> 
> I'm pretty sure the driver I backported from kernel-3.10 did not require these additional
> files so this looks like a new requirement introduced in a more recent kernel.

i do not known why this gets triggered under kernel 3.x., both modules shows references:

$ strings /lib/modules/3.14.0-1.el6.elrepo.x86_64/kernel/drivers/bluetooth/ath3k.ko |grep ar3k
ar3k/AthrBT_0x%08x.dfu
ar3k/ramps_0x%08x_%d%s

$ strings /lib/modules/2.6.32-431.el6.x86_64/extra/ath3k/ath3k.ko |grep ar3k
ar3k/AthrBT_0x%08x.dfu
ar3k/ramps_0x%08x_%d%s


> To date we haven't attempted to package additional firmwares for our elrepo kernel offerings
> (kernel-lt and kernel-ml) as things can quickly start to get messy, as you've already identified,
> with package conflicts.

> I'm open to suggestions, but so far we have pretty much left it to users to grab the firmware
> files they require and manually install them as you have done here. Packaging the linux firmware
> git tree has the potential to cause more problems than it solves.


It makes absolutely sense to provide separated firmware packages for the kmod 
packages (slim packages footprint). For the kernel rpms one consolidated package 
would make the job (like el7's linux-firmware rpm). this two valid scenarios are 
however conflicting. 

Thanks for your input.

--
LF