← Back to context

Comment by c-c-c-c-c

3 years ago

[flagged]

I'm happy to see things done right in the form of mainlining the necessary parts, but that takes _years_. Users shouldn't have to suffer with known security issues that have fixes readily available.

I've used this tool to support many dozens of end-of-life devices working well over the past six years, and it is even purpose-built for these Android/Qualcomm downstream kernels.

  • Maybe you could rework your process a bit, as a drive-by patchset with 400+ commits is not a great way to start a conversation. Some ideas:

    - Open an issue or post to the project's mailing list, proposing the use of your tool.

    - If you don't do so already, have your tool only apply patches to code that is actually compiled for the target, e.g. give it a .config and trace which source files are used in make.

    - Obtain the hardware for the devices your tool supports and donate your time to test the changes generated by your tool.

    • Only applying patches that may be necessary is absolutely non-trivial to compute, especially with dependent patchsets, kernel trees used by multiple devices, or future changes to their configs.

      I already provide monthly software updates for 170 devices using this tool which I've personally tested on two dozen devices plus many user reports on others. Making a (near) working PR conversation starter to demonstrate the tool I've spent years of my time on is my contribution.

      In this case where I didn't have a PinePhone I explicitly found a closest match (Google Pixel 1/marlin iirc) to the kernel at hand and applied my fix database to it as matching to increase the chance that it would be successful.

      I have absolutely zero doubts that someone can't apply the PR and be up and running in an hour.

      edit: to be extra clear, I'm not a company selling this tool or anything, it is purely a passion project for me and I do want others to use it or help them use it.