New comment by atweiden on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/pull/41062#issuecomment-1434086584

Comment:
@CameronNemo: just to clarify, the patches at [SvenKiljan/archlinuxarm-pbp-packages](https://github.com/SvenKiljan/archlinuxarm-pbp-packages) aren’t arbitrary. They’re the same patches new pbps are shipped with as part of Manjaro. From what I can tell, Manjaro is currently, and has been, actively upstreaming their own patches. Surely you’d agree Pine64/Manjaro is in an excellent position to *continue* upstreaming their own patches, and that the lack of a Manjaro patch being upstreamed at present doesn’t rule out its being upstreamed in the future, irrespective of my or anyone else’s at Void’s actions.

Is your position that the pinebookpro-kernel template should never include any patches beyond those made to our linuxX.Y templates? If so, why are we using the pinebookpro-kernel template, in the first place?

And if your position is that *Manjaro*’s patches need to be either upstreamed or discarded, why are 5 out of 6 patches in the pinebookpro-kernel template now seemingly from a nearly 2-year old version of Manjaro? It would be understandable if those patches weren’t your doing; I just hope you can see the reason for my confusion in regards to the consistency of your stated position. Am I misunderstanding something?

Because you asked, here’s one example of a usability issue solved by one of the latest pbp-specific Manjaro-origin patches:

> MicroSD card slot in the Pinebook Pro is located on a separate daughterboard that's connected to the mainboard using a rather long flat cable.  The resulting signal degradation causes many perfectly fine microSD cards not to work in the Pinebook Pro, which is a common source of frustration among the owners.