This makes a lot more sense; we can parse a firmware and export the same XML
we would use in a .builder.xml file. This allows us to two two things:
* Check we can round trip from XML -> binary -> XML
* Using a .builder.xml file we can check ->write() is endian safe
This allows us to 'nest' firmware formats, and removes a ton of duplication.
The aim here is to deprecate FuFirmwareImage -- it's almost always acting
as a 'child' FuFirmware instance, and even copies most of the vfuncs to allow
custom types. If I'm struggling to work out what should be a FuFirmware and
what should be a FuFirmwareImage then a plugin author has no hope.
For simple payloads we were adding bytes into an image and then the image into
a firmware. This gets really messy when most plugins are treating the FuFirmware
*as* the binary firmware file.
The GBytes saved in the FuFirmware would be considered the payload with the
aim of not using FuFirmwareImage in the single-image case.
The end year is legally and functionally redundant, and more importantly causes
cherry-pick conflicts when trying to maintain old branches. Use git for history.
The GLib g_byte_array_set_size() function does not zero the contents if the
array size is larger, which leads to unpredictable output when using valgrind.
The FWUPD_INSTALL_FLAG_FORCE flag has really unclear semantics, and ignoring a
file CRC, checksum or model ID should only be done when using fwupdtool actually
debugging a plugin or firmware parser.
Use the existing --force flag when we want a "gentle nudge" like reuploading
previously processed reports.
There's no reason to prevent NULL, and doing so means the caller has to check
before setting the value. Only one subclassed type was actually doing this...
