On Fri, Feb 04, 2022 at 10:59:18PM +0100, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Fri, 2022-02-04 at 13:56 -0800, Luis Chamberlain wrote: > > > > Look at it this way, you can apply this and then get upates in the > > future by just using one command (and folks do the effort as a group) > > or you can try to do the update now yourself and deal with the effort. > > > > No no, I meant > - remove the kconfig code > - add a rule to copy the kconfig code from the kernel we're generating > the backport from > > That might not really be ideal since you'd end up using kconfig from a > newer kernel against an older kernel, Yes. > but we have that either way, even > if we take your github tree? Indeed. > > As it is right Thomas was waiting on some update on kconfig on > > backports, so he can update the integration work. Which way do you > > prefer to go? > > That just needs patch 1, no? Um, it requires updating kconfig to work with some newer stuff. So no, I think it requires picking either updating kconfig manually or using this git subtree. > In integration I assume you don't use > backports's kconfig at all. It does, it uses the kernel target's kconfig. Luis -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe backports" in
