Proposed solution to the FCIB Problem

[codepoet80]

Generally, checking in binaries is bad -- I get it (see FCIB definition). But we're 12 years past when the ipkgmanager was last modified, and probably almost that long since its make file worked for anyone. There's really only two versions of that binary -- one that works on all ARM (including Pixi's v6), and one that works on i686 for the emulator. The PR proposes to just include them both in the source as FCIBs, and in the new build script, swap in the correct one (as defined in a build argument).

That plus the aforementioned requirement of supplying signing keys using a previous known-good build, gets us to "stand alone build" on modern dev environments without build infrastructure. The ipkgmanager source could become its own repo for posterity.

Open to other ideas!

[Herrie82]

@rwhitby The changes in general look good. I'm not a big fan of the binary being distributed like this, but seeing there is no build infrastructure in place like previously, it's the "necessary evil" I guess. If anyone is really concerned, they probably have the knowledge to build it from scratch themselves anyway.

[Herrie82]

@codepoet80: You might want to squish your commits together and just a bigger changelog in a single commit.

[frankykevin]

great