[14:49]  * enyc meows
[14:50] <enyc> there seem to be ongoing complaints/aguments about 5.4 problems, not sure how many bugreported well!
[15:02] <enyc> 14:50 <@djph> StephDev: wasn't 5.4 just some intermediary "hwe" mess?
[15:02] <enyc> 14:59 < StephDev> djph:  From my perspective, that's exactly what it is.. but I found it increasingly frustrating that immediately following release day, they froze hardware.. so you didn't see anything really happen unless it was in 5.6, 5.8 and 5.9 (most of it after 5.9.2).  13,000+ merges held?  REALLY?...  Meanwhile 5.4 saw so many regressions I stopped keeping track.. How many updated did we
[15:02] <enyc>  have where the only update was to undo the last up
[15:03] <enyc> anyhow, withotu wanting to stir up discontent or argument,  was just curious if ubuntu-kernel people have different perspective!
[15:03] <enyc> I can see, pragmatically, going to be useful to have multi-kernel options on some ubuntu/linuxmint isos, ALREADY seeing 3rd-party images to do just this etc.
[15:11] <bjf> @enyc, i don't understand what you are talking about. our LTS is 5.4 based and seems quite stable.
[15:12] <bjf> enyc, what does "I found it increasingly frustrating that immediately following release day, they froze hardware." mean? who is "they" that froze hardware?
[15:36] <jeremy31> bjf:  probably a Rizen discussion
[15:36] <enyc> jeremy31: quite possible, i dont' know exactly
[15:38] <jeremy31> enyc: there are a lot of commits not in upstream 5.4 kernel, saw that fixing a wifi issue
[15:39] <enyc> jeremy31: hrrrm i personally experience  unreliable iwlwifi  on debian 4.19 and even 5.9 bpo .......  but anyhow.
[15:39] <enyc> jeremy31: but that makes sense, not being maintained so well upstream
[15:39] <enyc> nonetheless, this raises question, what  Ubuntu 5.4 tend to do to patch-in chosen upstream changes 
[15:40] <jeremy31> enyc: probably need iwlwifi 11n_disable=8 to get better performance
[15:40] <enyc> appears, pragmatically, that distros may need to offer different kernel series in iso's to cover different users, at the moment
[15:40] <enyc> jeremy31: for me personally, random disconnects
[15:42] <bjf> enyc, we try really hard to support the ubuntu kernels we release with. if you have specific issues, please file a bug and come here and bring that bug # to our attention
[15:42] <enyc> bjf: righty-ho yes which clem was trying to encourage some todo
[15:42] <enyc> thankyou for answer!
[15:43] <bjf> enyc, our LTSs get 10 years of support ... the interim kernels only get 9 months so you really end up rolling from release to release
[15:47] <bjf> regarding AMD processor support .. it's a little complicated. if it's just adding processor IDs then that is fairly easy to add back to an LTS kernel. if there are new features that need to be enabled with backporting patches to the LTS kernel we are less inclined to do that. 
[15:49] <bjf> for feature type enablements that's why we do HWE kernels for the LTSs
[16:02] <enyc> yes
[23:15] <Beeblebrox-BSD> Hi, tring to set custom rez for monitor: 24" hdmi plugged in as joined display. GPU supports max 2560x1600_60, but laptop and external displays both set at 1920x1080_60. I would like the higher rez on the external 24" monitor. OS: Ububntu Groovy, + Gnome + wayland
[23:15] <Beeblebrox-BSD> My Q: The i915 kernel driver supports this rez from what I can tell - Can anyone cofirm that this is NOT a driver issue. Thx