"I woke up from my fever nap to crank this out..." actual neowofetch commit message
"I woke up from my fever nap to crank this out..."
actual neowofetch commit message
actual neowofetch commit message
Bi wish i'd written that as a commit message
Btime for another fever nap
N@j0rge @Kyle Gospo @Noel any way one of you could make a GitHub project board for yafti? I can just manage one in my fork until you guys get around to it so no urgency.
MInstead of copying from /usr/etc it should be a symlink to encourage people to not mess with the file.
If they remove the symlink then it's on them to make sure things work. The file alone can be modified but won't get our updates.
I'll add some stuff on the pull for getting shell completion working and zsh/fish stuff
If they remove the symlink then it's on them to make sure things work. The file alone can be modified but won't get our updates.
I'll add some stuff on the pull for getting shell completion working and zsh/fish stuff
DCan this be used to remove a lot of the version-conditional logic in the reusable part by moving it into the version-specific files?
ENot to scope creep again, but is there any reason for us not to use osbuild?
Jyeah, wasn't ready either
Jnone of the solutions had great support for oci installs still, so hacking it into anaconda or waiting for osbuild to support our use case
ESounds good. Thanks for clarifying. Can't wait for it to be ready. We'll have a lot more flexibility in what we can do
JI think it might be a while lol
E:/
JI added one to yafti
PHi, folks! It looks like the akmods builds for surface images are failing. Here are the latest actions in your akmods repo:
PThis has been happening for about three days, which was when a new version of the linux-surface kernel has been released (https://github.com/linux-surface/linux-surface/releases/tag/fedora-39-6.8.1-1).
PYou are building the akmods for 
6.7.9-1.surface.fc39.x86_64 while the current version is 6.8.1-1.surface.fc39.x86_64. I tried to find where that version was set so I could make a PR, but no luck 
N@Kyle Gospo @bsherman do we build a copr for this?
NMight just need to kick off a build for the copr if that's the case.
EWe don't. TAL
BTAL? I'm investigating this surface akmods issue right now...
Bso, no, we don't explicitly build for that version of the kernel, we build against the latest kernel in the surface-kernel repo
it seems that a few of the kmods are not compiling with 6.8... i actually saw this on our fedora preview builds, too
it seems that a few of the kmods are not compiling with 6.8... i actually saw this on our fedora preview builds, too
B@Kyle Gospo maybe instead of checking for F40, i should gate those broken kmod builds on kernel 6.8 for now?
KWorks for me, 6.8 I have to be careful with anyway
EGasket doesn't build against the Surface kernel causing the build to fail. The module likely just needs to be excluded
Bits because of 6.8
Bsame reason it fails on F40
KNobody is depending on gasket right now so we can just exclude until fixed
KI only included it here for ucore
Bwha?
KWe chatted a long time ago about it, gasket enables google TPU hardware
Bwho asked for gasket for ucore? I don't use it 
KSo you can do stuff like ML image recognition on a home security camera
Boh lol, well, i'm sorry, i don't recall, i've never actually installed it
KNice to have for a server OS
KYea that's fine, I opened an issue but it was like 7 months ago
KJust something to consider later when it's fixed
Bif we're going to have that for ucore, i'll have it in the ucore-kmods
KYep, wasn't even a thing when we added it
KSo let's just pull it and I'll pr there later when 6.8 is fixed
KIf you're interested
NTaking a look I think?
Bok, i'll pull gasket out for now, for sure. and see how it goes that way
Bi think simply rebuilding akmods will fix the nvidia red builds, too... it seems we built akmods just a bit "too soon"... it has a slightly older version of the nvidia version
550.67 is now current but earlier this morning it was still 550.54ERtl stuff is failing as well
EYup
Byeah I'm going to force merge this, since it's a distinct PR, which does a specific thing
then i'll work more on "fixing surface"
then i'll work more on "fixing surface"
ESounds good 
Bso... @Kyle Gospo any thoughts about this one?
other than liking my comment
other than liking my comment
GAny idea how best to handle the symlinks in the spec file? Also if I update the spec, would I need to update any external scripts with the correct path?
Mtmpfiles.d
G?
