Re: Any objections to removing address@hidden

[Ricardo Wurmus]

Mark H Weaver <address@hidden> writes:

> Does anyone here still need address@hidden in Guix?  If not, I'd like
> to remove it.

Is this not the only version of Linux libre that does not expose the
system clock bug Libreboot users suffer from?

I’m still using 4.1 on one of my machines for that reason until I can
upgrade Libreboot.

> Upstream security updates for it seem to be quite infrequent (2.5 months
> between the last two releases), and the recent update to 4.1.40
> neglected to include a fix for CVE-2017-6074, which does not inspire
> confidence.

Indeed.  Thank you for checking.

> What do you think?

It would be nice if it turned out that I’m wrong about 4.1 being needed
for older versions of Libreboot.  That’s my only objection to removing
it, but since that can be fixed by upgrading to a more recent Libreboot
(although that may be messy) I think it’s okay to remove it.

-- 
Ricardo

GPG: BCA6 89B6 3655 3801 C3C6  2150 197A 5888 235F ACAC
https://elephly.net