On Tuesday, 7 May 2024 15:49:45 CEST Mark Pearson wrote: > > As I see it, the primary problem is the lack of people actively > > contributing to the Debian kernel team's work. In general. > > Interesting read, and combined with my notes to Didier - is this something > where I and some in my team could maybe help? If you think it would be > worthwhile, does it make sense to setup a training session to walk me > through the steps so I can attempt a first pass, and then review where the > problems are and which bits are useful/not-useful. If the review/link > updating/etc was all done - would it make it easier for a DM to look at it > and go "yeah, that's solid" and release? *I* don't see where you/your team could help now. At least not for this particular issue. General help with f.e. bug triaging would still be welcomed I presume. At https://salsa.debian.org/kernel-team/firmware-nonfree/-/merge_requests/ you can find the MRs I made to make the firmware-nonfree packages all up to date. MR 85 is 'the BIG one' and in there I also mentioned that I also have an update to 20240312 in my fork which I can submit as MR too. MR 85 is also reviewed by a DD, but while they are *allowed* to make uploads for any package, they choose not to. And FWIW: I agree with that. I already mentioned that MR 85 is a BIG one (but the only one which needs to go through NEW), which in turn means that reviewing takes more then 10 minutes (to put it mildly). The update to 20230804 is also larger then average as some changes needed to be 'postponed' due to needing a new upstream version. The updates after that are indicative of what I suspect/hope future updates will look like. Unless a kernel-team member thinks that I didn't do it correctly. While I did my best, that's surely a possibility. So if you want to know what's generally involved into updating the firmware- nonfree packages, I suggest to look into my MRs. I have a tendency to be verbose in my commit messages, which may help. And the procedure I described earlier should match what you'll see in the updates after 20230804. > I can't highlight all patches needed for Meteorlake/Hawkpoint support - that > would be huge. I can highlight that a 6.8 kernel is needed; and which FW > packages are needed. While firmware package updates have lagged before, the kernel packages are normally quite up-to-date. But sometimes there are other factors which cause delays which normally aren't there. The time64 transition f.e. caused 'some' disruptions. But (my) update-to-6.8 MR has now been merged into master, so an update to the 6.8 kernel is in the works. HTH, Diederik
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.