NACK: [j/linux-raspi v2 RESEND4 PATCH 0/2] Make snapcraft.yaml work

[Masahiro Yamada]

On Fri, Feb 9, 2024 at 6:34 PM Juerg Haefliger
<juerg.haefliger at canonical.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 8 Feb 2024 12:35:53 +0000
> Dimitri John Ledkov <dimitri.ledkov at canonical.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi
> >
> > On Wed, 7 Feb 2024 at 06:46, Juerg Haefliger
> > <juerg.haefliger at canonical.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Still missing the requested SRU tag and SRU justification. Why are you
> > > refusing to follow our process?
> > >
> > > ...Juerg
> > >
> >
> > This is however not a .deb feature at all; nor should it end up in the
> > changelog. I'm not sure there is anything SRUish to justify here.
>
> It's a modification of the kernel source code of a stable kernel, so yes it's
> an SRU change. Whether that is user-visible or not is irrelevant and
> can be noted in the bug report. People have tooling to scrub the
> mailing list and missing SRU tags will/might drop patches. Checking the SRU
> justification in the bug report is one of the review steps. Why is it so hard
> to follow the documented process and make the life of the people involved
> easier?




I am not sure if this is related to SRU, but
can we regard this patch falls into the
category "Simple, obvious and short fixes" ?


https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelTeam/KernelUpdates






Is it acceptable if I add the following info to
the LP bug tracker?




SRU Justification:


Impact:
 The in-tree snapcraft.yaml is stale. It does not produce any
 functional kernel snap for jammy:linux-raspi.


Fix:
  Replace the stale snapcraft.yaml with a newly implemented one.


Testcase:

   Build a pi-kernel with the command:

    $ snapcraft --use-lxd --build-for=arm64

   or

    $ snapcraft --use-lxd --build-for=armhf

   Then, install it to Ubuntu Core 22 running on a raspi board.

    $ snap  install --dangerous <kernel-snap>

   Please note you need "grade: dangerous" for replacing
   the kernel from the local file.
















> ...Juerg
>
>
> > Separately, I want to try to see if doing this build in launchpad out
> > of the full kernel git tree will even work, due to the sheer size of
> > the clone to be done. In the past that would time out. That's why all
> > of our recipes are usually maintained out of tree. I am pondering if
> > this should just be a branch with snapcraft.yaml alone on the
> > ~canonical-kernel-snaps 22 snapcraft recipes repo only, with
> > snapcraft.yaml doing git clone of the pi kernel packaging repo with
> > depth set to 1.
> >
> >
> > >
> > > On Wed,  7 Feb 2024 11:22:04 +0900
> > > Masahiro Yamada <masahiro.yamada at canonical.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > linux-raspi added snapcraft.yaml more than a decade ago,
> > > > which is not functional at all.
> > > >
> > > > Remove the old one, and re-implement working snapcraft.yaml.
> > > >
> > > > BugLink: https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2051468
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Masahiro Yamada (2):
> > > >   UBUNTU: [Packaging] Remove old snapcraft.yaml
> > > >   UBUNTU: [Packaging] Add snapcraft.yaml for building uc22 pi-kernel
> > > >     snap
> > > >
> > > >  snapcraft.yaml | 175 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------
> > > >  1 file changed, 145 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > kernel-team mailing list
> > > kernel-team at lists.ubuntu.com
> > > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-team
> >
> >
> >
>