On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 01:09:39AM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Wed, 2018-06-13 at 13:23 +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
> > Hi Ben!
> > Could you please chime in to bug #901134 (RFS: anbox-modules)?
> > 
> > This package wants to ship redundant copies of two modules (ashmem and
> > binder) that are already in mainline since a long time ago.  This strikes me
> > as thoroughly wrong, yet I'm very ignorant about packaged kernels, thus I
> > can't offer good advice.
> I agree, I don't think it makes much sense to build these OOT if they
> can be built in-tree.

Here goes the bug #901492 (linux: Please enable Android ashmem and binder 

> The in-tree version of ashmem *cannot* be built as a module, though,
> which we would probably want to change.

Don't have knowledge about this, but I'd like to see it built as module.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to