Resending to correct list...

On 2020-06-08, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
> On 2020-04-17, Mark H Weaver wrote:
>> Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant@debian.org> wrote:
>>> I think the patcset now needs some minor updates to apply to master, but
>>> just wondering when we could consider switching to 5.6... ?
>>
>> I do not wish to be a blocker on this, and moreover I would welcome it
>> if someone else would step up to take over maintenance of our kernel
>> packages.
>
> Thanks for all your work!
>
> I've just pushed the source update for 5.7.1 (and packages for
> linux-libre-arm*-generic)...
>
>
>> However, I should say that for all previous kernel upgrades, I have
>> taken the time to consider each of the new configuration options
>> presented by "make oldconfig" and to try make a sensible choice for each
>> one.  I have not found it sufficient to rely on the automatically
>> selected choices, which very often default to "no" for modules that
>> ought to be included, and occasionally default to "yes" for options that
>> are contrary to our commitment to the GNU FSDG.
>>
>> I will leave it up to the Guix maintainers to decide what to do if no
>> one volunteers to take up the job of properly updating our default
>> kernel configurations.
>
> I still do not have the the time, ability or confidence to review
> updating the configs for multiple architectures...
>
> I wasn't able to produce a working config for 5.7.x on x86_64 (issues
> with graphics on intel prevented sway from loading), let alone one that
> has been scrutinized for correctness in terms of GNU FSDG.
>
> Can anyone else step in to help with reviewing kernel config updates?
>
> Alternately, is it plausible to work out a blacklist/whitelist feature
> for options that can get updated more dynamically that a whole kernel
> config? That's well outside my skillset in terms of guile, but that
> might be a more maintainable option for the future...
>
>
> live well,
>   vagrant