Bug#856932: Fwd: Bug#856932: hashcat dependency problem

[Gianfranco Costamagna]

Hi,





>Well, as said, the only correct way would be that the "hashcat" package directly depends on NVidia drivers, AMD drivers or Intel drivers.
>
>But as far as I understood this can't be enforced because otherwise the hashcat package can't be installed by default (and debian has the policy which doesn't allow >non-free packages to be shipped by default).
>
>Yeah, it would make sense to have a dependency tree like this:
>hashcat depends on hashcat-nvidia | hashcat-amd | hashcat-intel
>hashcat-nvidia depends on [proprietary Nvidia driver], hashcat-base
>hashcat-amd depends on [proprietary AMD driver], hashcat-base
>hashcat-intel depends on [proprietary Intel driver], hashcat-base
>
>(where "|" means "or"  and the [] denotes the correct drivers from nvidia.com, support.amd.com and software.intel.com correspondingly).


I tried to do something really similar to boinc, shipping cuda packages [1]

unfortunately this approach is not scaling too much for:
- Debian derivatives (they call graphical packages a little bit differently
- Custom drivers (e.g. download from the official repo the .run binary and install it, no deb involved
- ISO where you can't install all the drivers just because you can :p

I would be very upset about the system forcing me to install a driver because it can't detect my custom-built downloaded one.


[1] https://sources.debian.net/src/boinc/7.6.33%2Bdfsg-6exp1/debian/control/

(I know this is not applying completely to this bug report, but I wanted to give my .02$ about the topic)

(runtime warnings are probably the best thing we can do at this point)

cheers,

G.