Yes, sure, but SRU procedures require defining at least some base test
criteria. So I'd like us to include info about which exact Pi device is
affected and needs to be tested + maybe a requirement to test it on a
few other Pi's as well, just to be sure we did not regress. We need to
look at the bigger picture here - and that's what the SRU procedures are
for. So that we have clarity on what to test, what's the impact and how
to gauge the risk. Anyway, this is basically just paperwork to fill in.
I checked the diff and compared it with the diff we had in focal - and
it seems sane, there we also had so many removed lines (guess bluez etc.
went away). I'm a bit worried about one more change, but I *think* I
know why it was in focal. So in focal there was "+Breaks: flash-kernel
(<<3.103)", and I assume it's because we had some bad changes in flash-
kernel 3.98ubuntu12 (which was the previous version). Bionic was stuck
on 3.98ubuntu11~18.04.2. But the question is: is that flash-kernel
version good enough? What was this interaction between the two packages?
That's useful to check. I'll let it in as-is, but I'll need both the
paperwork filled in and the flash-kernel breaks explained before we go
out with this.
** Changed in: linux-firmware-raspi2 (Ubuntu Bionic)
Status: Incomplete => Fix Committed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1940400
Title:
Pi 4B 2GB boot failure
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-firmware-raspi2/+bug/1940400/+subscriptions
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
