Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

rtl8821ce: update for Linux 5.0 and 5.1 compatibility #61332

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

acowley
Copy link
Contributor

@acowley acowley commented May 12, 2019

Motivation for this change

Realtek 8821ce driver update for kernel 5.0 and 5.1

Things done
  • Tested using sandboxing (nix.useSandbox on NixOS, or option sandbox in nix.conf on non-NixOS)
  • Built on platform(s)
    • NixOS
    • macOS
    • other Linux distributions
  • Tested via one or more NixOS test(s) if existing and applicable for the change (look inside nixos/tests)
  • Tested compilation of all pkgs that depend on this change using nix-shell -p nix-review --run "nix-review wip"
  • Tested execution of all binary files (usually in ./result/bin/)
  • Determined the impact on package closure size (by running nix path-info -S before and after)
  • Assured whether relevant documentation is up to date
  • Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.

@acowley
Copy link
Contributor Author

acowley commented May 12, 2019

I had been using a private derivation for this networking adapter for a long time as I didn't notice when it was added to nixpkgs. I happened to see a broken build for it on hydra for current kernels the other day; this should fix it.

@FRidh
Copy link
Member

FRidh commented May 12, 2019

Should anything be done with the version attribute?

@acowley
Copy link
Contributor Author

acowley commented May 12, 2019

It’s a great question. My preference would be to switch entirely to a date based version number because what we have is, afaiu, too ad hoc. Realtek made one code drop a year+ ago, and I’m not sure what versioning approach is used by the various entities that have patched their copies of that release since then.

I’m open to whatever anyone wants to do, however.

@acowley
Copy link
Contributor Author

acowley commented May 25, 2019

Perhaps this is better done out of the nixpkgs tree as it needs some work to keep it updated promptly in the presence of kernel changes. I'll keep maintaining my derivation as long as I'm able to; anyone who finds their way here should feel free to use that.

@acowley acowley closed this May 25, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants