Am 11.05.20 um 20:20 schrieb Don Zickus: > On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 09:52:43AM -0700, stan wrote: >> On Mon, 11 May 2020 09:44:54 -0700 >> stan <[email protected]> wrote: >> arch/x86/kernel/setup.c:820:13: warning: 'rh_check_supported' defined but >> not used [-Wunused-function] >> 820 | static void rh_check_supported(void) >> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > Odd, the ELN build didn't fail for that reason. > > In theory, an ELN build should have failed, someone noticed it was related > to a specific RH patch, we revert it temporarily until it is fixed and then > re-apply. Still some kinks.
While at it: I noticed the number of patches that are applied to the kernel sources went up from nearly 40 to about 75 with the kernel-ark transition. Among those 35 additional patches are afaics quite a few that are really specific to RHEL (like the one that caused this) and not needed for Fedora apart from the ELN. The one that caused this afaics is one of them. Is that intentional or just something that will get cleaned up? Side note: What's up with the "Upstream Status: RHEL only" in the commit messages? They could help differentiating Fedora and ELN/RHEL specific patches, but that tag is present in some patches that afaics are needed for Fedora (like 0001-efi-Add-an-EFI_SECURE_BOOT-flag-to-indicate-secure-b.patch) CU, knurd _______________________________________________ kernel mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected]
