From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: bug#30847: Cannot upgrade GuixSD due to check-device-initrd-modules Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2018 15:19:46 +0200 Message-ID: <87605hwt8t.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87zi351h0t.fsf@vany.ca> <87fu4wuhyz.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:58946) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f0oWI-0002ps-L7 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 09:20:14 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f0oWB-00075V-28 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 09:20:10 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:47429) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f0oWA-00075H-UB for bug-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 09:20:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1f0oWA-00069e-Nb for bug-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 09:20:02 -0400 Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <87fu4wuhyz.fsf@gnu.org> ("Ludovic \=\?utf-8\?Q\?Court\=C3\=A8s\=22'\?\= \=\?utf-8\?Q\?s\?\= message of "Mon, 19 Mar 2018 17:51:16 +0100") List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" To: Adam Van Ymeren Cc: 30847@debbugs.gnu.org Ping! :-) ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Court=C3=A8s) skribis: > Hello Adam, > > Adam Van Ymeren skribis: > >> My root device is on NVMe. >> >> In my current kernel config CONFIG_NVME_CORE is set to a module, which is >> included in my initrd. >> >> However upstream defconfig has been changed to CONFIG_NVME_CORE=3Dy > > Out of curiosity, what=E2=80=99s the current and target kernel versions? > > Like Danny wrote, =E2=80=98check-device-initrd-modules=E2=80=99 can have = false positives > as it is, in which case you have to use =E2=80=98--skip-checks=E2=80=99. > > We could arrange to not have false positives, but the UX would be a > little less good because we=E2=80=99d first need to build the target kern= el. So > I wonder how frequent the situation you experienced is. > > Thanks for your report! > > Ludo=E2=80=99.