Re: [RFC] Removing sys-kernel/vanilla-kernel

Sam James <[email protected]> Tue, 02 Jun 2026 18:06:43 +0100
Newsgroups	gmane.linux.gentoo.devel
Organization	Gentoo
Message-ID	<[email protected]>
Immolo <[email protected]> writes:

> Hi,
>
> In the more fringe areas I monitor for my work looking for  handbook
> and doc bugs in the wiki, I have found:
>
>> 1) Drop vanilla-sources as well.
>
> I've noticed there is a user base around sys-kernel/vanilla-sources.
> Their reasoning is they like pulling kernels directly from kernel.org
> and this gives them a package manager solution for their needs.

But they're still relying on us to do it promptly *and* not have removed
the relevant ebuild.

I really think vanilla use is usually fetishisation of an "untainted"
kernel without realising:
a) we don't change much at all, deliberately, and
b) kernel.org is not some sort of perfect entity.

>
> There should at least be a callout to give those users the chance to
> take the maintaining burden themselves before any action is taken IMO.
>
>> 2) Drop vanilla-sources and add a vanilla USE flag to gentoo-sources.
>
> This is one of those ideas so good I wonder why we didn't do it before.
>
> My selfish reasoning is it will allow me to streamline the messy kernel
> docs even further, which has been an ongoing task for the last few years.
>
>
> As for vanilla-kernel. I have at best seen one user that uses it in the last
> 6 years.

The only time I've used it is for bisecting with the 9999s.

>
> While that sounds bad, it should be noted we don't do a good job of highlighting
> it exists and we have only just started to highlight how the dist kernel can be
> used in a way that is similar to how we used to explain genkernel.
>
> I would suggest vanilla-kernel has no purpose now for us to waste time on, so
> drop it. However someone should look into if genkernel users use vanilla-sources
> as sys-kernel/vanilla-kernel is going to be their migration path keeps
> heading on its
> current path of issues.There is likely a day we would need to think
> about bringing it
> back, but in a better way than we currently provide this package.
>

I'm not sure there's much of a connection there. People may be using
vanilla-sources with or without an initramfs, right? Regardless of if
genkernel made it or something else.

> I hope there are at least some useful insights in here to help further
> discussions.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> immolo
signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 418 B)