Now as boot-deploy allows us to generate both boot.img and extlinux.conf
at the same time, enable generating the config for all msm8916 since it
will be used in the future lk2nd release. boot.img is still kept to keep
compatibility with current lk2nd releases and to allow system recovery
with fastboot when required.
[ci:skip-build] already built successfully in CI
[ci:ignore-count]
motorola-osprey can generally use the firmware from motorola-harpia
(which is a bit newer). However, the WCNSS_qcom_wlan_nv.bin is usually
device specific (it contains some kind of calibration values for
WiFi/BT).
The file packaged in firmware-motorola-osprey-wcnss-nv is identical to
the file in firmware-motorola-harpia-wcnss-nv. However, It looks a bit
like this might be a mistake in the source repository
(https://github.com/pmsourcedump/firmware-motorola-osprey). The
wlan/prima folder there is completely identical to the one used for
motorola-harpia, but the stock ROM and LineageOS use different files.
Fix this by packaging the file from TheMuppets. Also modernize the
firmware-motorola-osprey package by applying pil-squasher to the
venus/video firmware.
motorola-osprey has a very clunky name at the moment "Motorola Moto G
3rd gen. (2015)". The device was mostly just called "Motorola Moto G"
by Motorola, so it is hard to choose a fitting (but unique) name.
In the postmarketOS wiki it is called "Motorola Moto G 2015" so let's
just drop the "3rd gen." in the pmOS device package as well.
Also make the deviceinfo consistent with harpia while at it.
The files packaged in firmware-motorola-osprey-wcnss-nv and
firmware-motorola-osprey-venus seem completely identical to those
of harpia, so there is no need to package them twice. There are some
differences in modem/wcnss firmware but those are now covered by the
msm-firmware-loader.
[ci:ignore-count]
[ci:skip-vercheck] needed for the postmarketos-ui-* packages in this
series
[ci:skip-build] already built ui-* packages in CI, and device pacakges
are just trivial deviceinfo change (manually built some just to verify)
At the moment we have Contributor: lines on some packages (but not all of them),
but often they don't represent the actual contributors to the package very well.
E.g. when we added them retroactively to the device packages we only added
the initial contributor (which isn't necessarily the person
who made most of the work for a device...)
The Git history is the most representative source for figuring out
who contributed to a package, so there is no reason to duplicate that
into the APKBUILD.
[skip ci]: way too many packages
Prepare for better device categorization by moving everything to testing
subdir first.
[skip-ci]: chicken-egg problem: passing pmaports CI depends on pmbootstrap MR
depends on this MR
Related: postmarketos#16
