Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 399821 - sys-kernel/amd-ucode-2012.01.17 please remove RESTRICT="mirror" if possible
Summary: sys-kernel/amd-ucode-2012.01.17 please remove RESTRICT="mirror" if possible
Status: RESOLVED UPSTREAM
Alias: None
Product: Gentoo Linux
Classification: Unclassified
Component: [OLD] Core system (show other bugs)
Hardware: All Linux
: Normal normal
Assignee: Diego Elio Pettenò (RETIRED)
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2012-01-23 12:30 UTC by Nikoli
Modified: 2012-05-12 22:05 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Package list:
Runtime testing required: ---


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Nikoli 2012-01-23 12:30:51 UTC
amd64.org is down for several days, not able to download amd-ucode-2012-01-17.tar Same problem was reported in bug 399287
Was looking for alternate locations, but found nothing.
Fedora mirrors and packages have amd-ucode-2011-01-11.tar
http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/repo/pkgs/microcode_ctl/amd-ucode-2011-01-11.tar/aa9ed7a490f37e0d250ca46d0f31682b/amd-ucode-2011-01-11.tar (RMD160 SHA1 SHA256 size are correct)

microcode_ctl rpms have /lib/firmware/amd-ucode/microcode_amd.bin:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/microcode_ctl
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/rpminfo?rpmID=2885659

May be licenses/amd-ucode is wrong or obsolete? Or Fedora has a special licensing deal? Also I found this topic:
http://fossplanet.com/f10/amd-microcode-updates-80741/

If possible, please add amd-ucode-2012-01-17.tar to mirrors or provide some fallback SRC_URI.
Comment 1 Diego Elio Pettenò (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2012-01-23 12:38:16 UTC
I'll leave it to the licenses team; license/amd-ucode is properly updated and I have no intention to take it upon me to mirror this given the license.
Comment 2 Ulrich Müller gentoo-dev 2012-01-23 15:35:32 UTC
I'd feel uneasy if mirror restriction was lifted for this package. As I read it, the first two paragraphs imply that mirror admins would have to explicitly agree to the license.

Maybe you should ask upstream for clarification?