[bug#66968] [PATCH] gnu: linux-libre: add linux-libre-stable & linux-libre-longterm

[bug#66968] [PATCH] gnu: linux-libre: add linux-libre-stable & linux-libre-longterm

[Michael Ford]

From dbe93718ea3dbae9d3e4795d0cea239cd3d6a674 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: fanquake <fanquake@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 5 Nov 2023 18:31:55 +0000
Subject: [PATCH] gnu: linux-libre: add linux-libre-stable &
 linux-libre-longterm

A project I'm involved with would find it convenient to have pointers to
the current stable / longterm kernel header branches, without having to
specify an exact version. This way, we can point to i.e the longterm
branch, and with each time-machine "bump", continue to have whatever the
current longerm branch happens to be. So I'm submitting this patch for
discussion / inclusion. Obviouly one overhead is remembering to keep
these variables in sync whenever the status of the longterm/stable
branches changes.

* gnu/packages/linux (linux-libre-stable): New variable.
  (linux-libre-longerm): New variable.
---
 gnu/packages/linux.scm | 2 ++
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

diff --git a/gnu/packages/linux.scm b/gnu/packages/linux.scm
index 95a66e3d6a..a50526734e 100644
--- a/gnu/packages/linux.scm
+++ b/gnu/packages/linux.scm
@@ -790,6 +790,8 @@ (define-public linux-libre-headers-5.15.49

"13zqdcm4664vh7g57sxbfrlpsxm7zrma72mxdfdz7d9yndy2gfv8"))

 (define-public linux-libre-headers linux-libre-headers-5.15.49)
+(define-public linux-libre-stable linux-libre-headers-6.5)
+(define-public linux-libre-longterm linux-libre-headers-6.1)



 ;;;
-- 
2.42.1

[bug#66968] [PATCH] gnu: linux-libre: add linux-libre-stable & linux-libre-longterm

[Maxim Cournoyer]

Hello,

Michael Ford <fanquake@gmail.com> writes:

>>From dbe93718ea3dbae9d3e4795d0cea239cd3d6a674 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: fanquake <fanquake@gmail.com>
> Date: Sun, 5 Nov 2023 18:31:55 +0000
> Subject: [PATCH] gnu: linux-libre: add linux-libre-stable &
>  linux-libre-longterm
>
> A project I'm involved with would find it convenient to have pointers to
> the current stable / longterm kernel header branches, without having to
> specify an exact version. This way, we can point to i.e the longterm
> branch, and with each time-machine "bump", continue to have whatever the
> current longerm branch happens to be. So I'm submitting this patch for
> discussion / inclusion. Obviouly one overhead is remembering to keep
> these variables in sync whenever the status of the longterm/stable
> branches changes.
>
> * gnu/packages/linux (linux-libre-stable): New variable.
>   (linux-libre-longerm): New variable.
> ---
>  gnu/packages/linux.scm | 2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/gnu/packages/linux.scm b/gnu/packages/linux.scm
> index 95a66e3d6a..a50526734e 100644
> --- a/gnu/packages/linux.scm
> +++ b/gnu/packages/linux.scm
> @@ -790,6 +790,8 @@ (define-public linux-libre-headers-5.15.49
>
> "13zqdcm4664vh7g57sxbfrlpsxm7zrma72mxdfdz7d9yndy2gfv8"))
>
>  (define-public linux-libre-headers linux-libre-headers-5.15.49)
> +(define-public linux-libre-stable linux-libre-headers-6.5)
> +(define-public linux-libre-longterm linux-libre-headers-6.1)

Sounds like a reasonable thing to have.  Leo, Wilko, what do you think?

Reviewed-by: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@gmail>

--
Thanks,
Maxim

[bug#66968] [PATCH] gnu: linux-libre: add linux-libre-stable & linux-libre-longterm

[Leo Famulari]

On Fri, Sep 13, 2024 at 11:36:10PM +0900, Maxim Cournoyer wrote:
> >  (define-public linux-libre-headers linux-libre-headers-5.15.49)
> > +(define-public linux-libre-stable linux-libre-headers-6.5)
> > +(define-public linux-libre-longterm linux-libre-headers-6.1)
> 
> Sounds like a reasonable thing to have.  Leo, Wilko, what do you think?

The package named 'linux-libre' is by definition the latest stable
kernel:

https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git/tree/gnu/packages/linux.scm?id=22a34ea792ef0df15fd30d46f557b572c61d5404#n513

Should we add an alias for it?

We also have a package called 'linux-libre-lts', which is supposed to be
the most recent kernel with long-term support.

I think the phrasing "longterm" is more idiomatic for Linux, so we could
replace the -lts package with a -longterm package if people prefer that.

[bug#66968] [PATCH] gnu: linux-libre: add linux-libre-stable & linux-libre-longterm

[Maxim Cournoyer]

Hi Leo,

Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> writes:

> On Fri, Sep 13, 2024 at 11:36:10PM +0900, Maxim Cournoyer wrote:
>> >  (define-public linux-libre-headers linux-libre-headers-5.15.49)
>> > +(define-public linux-libre-stable linux-libre-headers-6.5)
>> > +(define-public linux-libre-longterm linux-libre-headers-6.1)
>> 
>> Sounds like a reasonable thing to have.  Leo, Wilko, what do you think?
>
> The package named 'linux-libre' is by definition the latest stable
> kernel:
>
> https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git/tree/gnu/packages/linux.scm?id=22a34ea792ef0df15fd30d46f557b572c61d5404#n513
>
> Should we add an alias for it?

This wasn't requested... I guess the main use here is using older kernels.

> We also have a package called 'linux-libre-lts', which is supposed to be
> the most recent kernel with long-term support.

Michael, did you know about 'linux-libre-lts' ? It seems it would suite
your 'linux-libre-longterm' request well?

> I think the phrasing "longterm" is more idiomatic for Linux, so we could
> replace the -lts package with a -longterm package if people prefer that.

Sorry, I had forgotten we already had -lts.  I guess we're already
covered then.

For the linux-libre-headers, I agree that the current situation is odd
at best; it should be renamed to linux-libre-headers/pinned or
something, since it's propagated by our build toolchain if I recall
correctly and entails a world rebuild.

linux-libre-headers could then point to the latest and greatest,
in sync with linux-libre.

Does that make sense?  Renaming the package variable shouldn't cause any
rebuild.

-- 
Thanks,
Maxim