what is not understandable is why in BOTH stable and testing under a GNOME DE you get both the callendar and weather front-ends to be configured to auto default to ON with regards to syncing and location tracking.
if i explicitly thick the Settings > Privacy > Location Tracking to OFF before i even connect to my ISPs gateway to the www then why is it still not in effect when i individually checked the fron-ends of the speciffic apps ?
not to mention the auto-check-with-time-server under Settings > date-and-time ā¦ set it to blody MANUAL and OFF by default for Peteās sake !
So, I eventually switched to Byzantium, but the KDE Live couldnāt deal with LUKS, so I had to go an unorthodox route: install a bare minimal Debian Stable from Netinstall, and then add PureOS keychain, replace the sources.list, and make sure everything is dandy with some pinning.
Now I have a proper PureOS, but - and this is where I will invoke the rage of 3 distros at once -, I also added - with proper pinning well below PureOS - the repos of Kali and Parrot, including the contrib and non-free sections.
* running from stones, continuing the argument from a distance *
All three distros track Testing, but in a safer, slower way, so itās not as risky as running a pure Testing. But I also need some packages that are not available from the PureOS software collection. Main is always from PureOS, per pinning, no way that anything can replace those packages.
Why donāt use Kali or Parrot then? Because they still have some quirks that are focused on pentesting, while PureOS is focused on regular usage - but with some hardening included.
So, I have the best of 3 worlds. But otherwise, the selection of packages from Kali or Parrot are very minimal. I have not encountered dependency conflicts so far with anything that I need.
Canāt say I blame you. Iām pretty patient, but itās more than a month later and none of the conflicts Iāve mentioned above have been resolved. Neither has libflashrom1 been ported yet.
I wonder what is the blocker. If itās lack of time on Purismās side, itās probably wise to switch to a distribution with a larger team behind it.
Iām no expert but I can see that Maintainer of libflashrom1 is Debian EFI, same as fwupd. Perhaps you want to check if fwupd package is installed (almost sure) and perhaps consider to remove it (temporarily).
Or try (on your own risk) with dpkg -i Filename: pool/main/f/fwupd/fwupd_1.3.11-1_amd64.deb and Filename: pool/main/f/flashrom/libflashrom1_1.2-5_amd64.deb, rest of dependent packages for āyour byzantiumā you need to find yourself.
IMO, this sort of compatibility issue (preventive and not to play around) with PureOS might be understood (just understood, not solved from someone that is not PureOS maintainer) if put in context of:
).