linux_4_19: drop

[fabianhjr]

Description of changes

Documented here as something to do alongside the feature freeze announcement about 8 weeks before scheduled release of next stable: https://nixos.github.io/release-wiki/Feature-Freeze-Announcement.html?highlight=kernel#pre-release-cleanupza

Remove attributes that we know we will not be able to support, especially if there is a stable alternative. E.g. Check that our Linux kernels’ projected end-of-life are after our release projected end-of-life.

The feature freeze announcement should be done 8 weeks before the release to inform subsystem maintainers about the upcoming feature freeze

We are already about 8 weeks to release

Things done

• Built on platform(s)
  • [ ] x86_64-linux
  • [ ] aarch64-linux
  • [ ] x86_64-darwin
  • [ ] aarch64-darwin
• For non-Linux: Is sandboxing enabled in nix.conf? (See Nix manual)
  • [ ] sandbox = relaxed
  • [ ] sandbox = true
• [ ] Tested, as applicable:
  • NixOS test(s) (look inside nixos/tests)
  • and/or package tests
  • or, for functions and "core" functionality, tests in lib/tests or pkgs/test
  • made sure NixOS tests are linked to the relevant packages
• [ ] Tested compilation of all packages that depend on this change using nix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review rev HEAD". Note: all changes have to be committed, also see nixpkgs-review usage
• [ ] Tested basic functionality of all binary files (usually in ./result/bin/)
• 24.11 Release Notes (or backporting 23.11 and 24.05 Release notes)
  • [ ] (Package updates) Added a release notes entry if the change is major or breaking
  • [ ] (Module updates) Added a release notes entry if the change is significant
  • [ ] (Module addition) Added a release notes entry if adding a new NixOS module
• [x] Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.

---

Add a :+1: reaction to pull requests you find important.

[K900]

Is it over?

[fabianhjr]

4.19    Greg Kroah-Hartman & Sasha Levin    2018-10-22  Dec, 2024

As per release procedures for stable LTS kernels that reach EOL during release must be dropped before branch off. (though probably can wait a bet closer to said branch off)

[fabianhjr]

Documented here as something to do alongside the feature freeze announcement: https://nixos.github.io/release-wiki/Feature-Freeze-Announcement.html?highlight=kernel#pre-release-cleanupza

Remove attributes that we know we will not be able to support, especially if there is a stable alternative. E.g. Check that our Linux kernels’ projected end-of-life are after our release projected end-of-life.

The feature freeze announcement should be done 8 weeks before the release to inform subsystem maintainers about the upcoming feature freeze

We are already about 8 weeks to release

[RossComputerGuy]

Result of nixpkgs-review pr 343283 run on aarch64-linux 1

1 package failed to build:

• linuxKernel.packages.linux_5_10.pktgen

3 packages built:

• linuxKernel.packages.linux_5_10.oci-seccomp-bpf-hook
• linuxKernel.packages.linux_5_10.oci-seccomp-bpf-hook.man
• linuxKernel.packages.linux_5_10.odp-dpdk

[RossComputerGuy]

linuxKernel.packages.linux_5_10.pktgen fails due to:

pktgen> FAILED: app/pktgen.p/pktgen-arp.c.o
pktgen> gcc -Iapp/pktgen.p -Iapp -I../app -Ilib/common -I../lib/common -Ilib/utils -I../lib/utils -Ilib/vec -I../lib/vec -Ilib/plugin -I../lib/plugin -Ilib/cli -I../lib/cli -Ilib/lua -I../lib/lua -I/nix/store/kva1f093lwlncwl2cvvj7b6cln3qv7cs-dpdk-23.11/include -I/nix/store/hy6ywqyzl6biizivil31isdpb5xrv12v-libbsd-0.12.2-dev/include -I/nix/store/k1laas1kx62kdmlnhnmqmandb8i0wiin-numactl-2.0.18-dev/include -I/nix/store/z50i62qdg6d8l234n1pfsbajq6ig3jih-libpcap-1.10.4/include -fdiagnostics-color=always -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -Wall -Winvalid-pch -Wextra -Wpedantic -Werror -DALLOW_EXPERIMENTAL_API -D_GNU_SOURCE -Wno-pedantic -Wno-format-truncation -pthread -include rte_config.h -march=armv8-a+crc -moutline-atomics '-D__PROJECT_VERSION="23.10.0"' -MD -MQ app/pktgen.p/pktgen-arp.c.o -MF app/pktgen.p/pktgen-arp.c.o.d -o app/pktgen.p/pktgen-arp.c.o -c ../app/pktgen-arp.c
pktgen> In file included from /nix/store/970mrbrvg7gnbhgm59smc2vmc5wv91s3-glibc-2.39-52-dev/include/string.h:548,
pktgen>                  from ../lib/cli/cli_scrn.h:22,
pktgen>                  from ../app/pktgen-arp.c:9:
pktgen> In function 'memcpy',
pktgen>     inlined from 'pktgen_process_arp' at ../app/pktgen-arp.c:146:17:
pktgen> /nix/store/970mrbrvg7gnbhgm59smc2vmc5wv91s3-glibc-2.39-52-dev/include/bits/string_fortified.h:29:10: error: argument 1 null where non-null expected [-Werror=nonnull]
pktgen>    29 |   return __builtin___memcpy_chk (__dest, __src, __len,
pktgen>       |          ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
pktgen>    30 |                                  __glibc_objsize0 (__dest));
pktgen>       |                                  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
pktgen> /nix/store/970mrbrvg7gnbhgm59smc2vmc5wv91s3-glibc-2.39-52-dev/include/bits/string_fortified.h:29:10: note: in a call to built-in function '__builtin_memcpy'
pktgen> cc1: all warnings being treated as errors

[fabianhjr]

Will investigatte, thought this would be 0 rebuilds :eyes:

[fabianhjr]

Now I am confused why nixpkgs-review attempted 4 builds and ofborg detects this as 0 rebuilds.

rereading the changes seems like ofborg is correct but weird nonetheless.

[RossComputerGuy]

Now I am confused why nixpkgs-review attempted 4 builds and ofborg detects this as 0 rebuilds.

Likely something with aliases?

[fabianhjr]

Looking at past drops this is a bit early by about 1-2 weeks however I don't think there is much expectation to retain this LTS much longer nor until branchoff.

Any opinions on whether to hold off or go ahead?

[RossComputerGuy]

I have no objections to merging it now, we don't have to always conform to the timeline. If someone wants to merge this, they're free to do so.