-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 20
README: Supported platforms: add kernel version and Debian details #35
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Changes from all commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
|
|
@@ -30,6 +30,10 @@ handling the ACL and more. | |
|
|
||
|
|
||
| ## Supported OSes | ||
|
|
||
| Linux kernel v4.13.0 or later is required. | ||
|
|
||
| - Debian 9.0 (stretch) - [package status / QA page](https://packages.qa.debian.org/thunderbolt-tools) - [bug reports](https://bugs.debian.org/src:thunderbolt-tools) | ||
|
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. First, thanks for adding it! Until now, the 'Supported OSes' used to tell which distro we know this to be compiled and installed correctly on (and preferably, testing it on).
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. To become an official package in Ubuntu, it has to go through Debian anyway, even Ubuntu's official documentation says that. So when people get it from Ubuntu in future, most of them won't be downloading from Github, they'll be installing the package that has gone through Debian into Ubuntu. When something is in Debian, any unit tests you include are automatically run each time it is (re)compiled and you can see the build logs, including unit test output, on the build farm Have you had any direct communication with Colin and Kamal, the maintainers of the Debian package or any other Debian developers? |
||
| - Ubuntu* 16.04 and 17.04 | ||
| - Fedora* 26 | ||
| - Clear Linux* | ||
|
|
||
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Just realized that this sentence is too restrictive.
This is true for the upstream ('vanilla') kernel, but distros may backport the driver to previous kernel versions.
Maybe something like
The required Linux kernel driver was upstreamed in v4.13? Makes sense? Too much technical?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Maybe it could say "Linux kernel v4.13.0 includes the necessary hardware driver. If using an older kernel then the standalone Thunderbolt driver version X.Y.Z or later needs to be installed as a module."
That should probably include a link to the driver too. Does it seem accurate?