Re: Any objections to removing address@hidden

[Mark H Weaver]

Ricardo Wurmus <address@hidden> writes:

> 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 don't know.  I had a vague recollection of hearing that the problem
has since been resolved, but I'm not sure.

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

Okay, we can hold off on removing it for now.  However, Sasha Levin (the
upstream linux-4.1.x maintainer) told me that this series will reach
end-of-life in 2 months, at which point it will stop receiving security
updates.  At that point we'll need to remove 4.1 and find another
solution for Libreboot users, if needed.  One option would be to add a
much older LTS kernel.  Of those, the most well maintained (judging
solely by the dates of their most recent release) seem to be 3.16 and
3.2.

      Mark