FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Debian > Debian Kernel

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 03-20-2011, 02:22 AM
Ben Hutchings
 
Default Bug#618976: Please support ppc64

On Sun, 2011-03-20 at 10:56 +0900, Hiroyuki Yamamoto wrote:
> Package: linux-2.6
> Version: 2.6.38-1
> Severity: wishlist
> Tags: patch
>
> Hi,
>
> Please support ppc64.

Is 'ppc64' an official port yet?

Why does this patch add a new config file rather than referring to
powerpc/config and powerpc/config.powerpc64?

Ben.

--
Ben Hutchings
Once a job is fouled up, anything done to improve it makes it worse.
 
Old 03-20-2011, 03:21 AM
Hiroyuki Yamamoto
 
Default Bug#618976: Please support ppc64

Hi,

(2011年03月20日 12:22), Ben Hutchings wrote:
>>
>> Please support ppc64.
>
> Is 'ppc64' an official port yet?

No, not 'official' port now.
However, considerable parts of the environment for ppc64 port still remain in the packaging system.

> Why does this patch add a new config file rather than referring to
> powerpc/config and powerpc/config.powerpc64?

Well, I used the same files as powerpc port for the time being.
I think that the same file should be indicated if it is necessary to be managed as the same one for easiness.
And I also think that a different file should be indicated if the possibility to be managed as another file is left.
This may be likely to discuss it.

Regards,
--
Hiroyuki Yamamoto
A75D B285 7050 4BF9 AEDA 91AC 3A10 59C6 5203 04DC



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 4D8580C4.7080404@gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/4D8580C4.7080404@gmail.com
 
Old 03-20-2011, 12:18 PM
Ben Hutchings
 
Default Bug#618976: Please support ppc64

On Sun, 2011-03-20 at 13:21 +0900, Hiroyuki Yamamoto wrote:
> Hi,
>
> (2011年03月20日 12:22), Ben Hutchings wrote:
> >>
> >> Please support ppc64.
> >
> > Is 'ppc64' an official port yet?
>
> No, not 'official' port now.
> However, considerable parts of the environment for ppc64 port still
> remain in the packaging system.

I didn't mean 'is it a release architecture'. Well, I found the answer:
<http://www.debian.org/ports/#unreleased> does list ppc64.

> > Why does this patch add a new config file rather than referring to
> > powerpc/config and powerpc/config.powerpc64?
>
> Well, I used the same files as powerpc port for the time being.
> I think that the same file should be indicated if it is necessary to
> be managed as the same one for easiness.
> And I also think that a different file should be indicated if the
> possibility to be managed as another file is left.
> This may be likely to discuss it.

It would still be possible to override config options. But I think
ppc64/powerpc64 should be the same as powerpc/powerpc64. (Just as
amd64/amd64 is the same as i386/amd64, and sparc64/sparc64 is the same
as sparc/sparc64.)

Ben.

--
Ben Hutchings
Once a job is fouled up, anything done to improve it makes it worse.
 
Old 03-20-2011, 01:47 PM
Ben Hutchings
 
Default Bug#618976: Please support ppc64

On Sun, 2011-03-20 at 13:18 +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Sun, 2011-03-20 at 13:21 +0900, Hiroyuki Yamamoto wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > (2011年03月20日 12:22), Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Please support ppc64.
> > >
> > > Is 'ppc64' an official port yet?
> >
> > No, not 'official' port now.
> > However, considerable parts of the environment for ppc64 port still
> > remain in the packaging system.
>
> I didn't mean 'is it a release architecture'. Well, I found the answer:
> <http://www.debian.org/ports/#unreleased> does list ppc64.
>
> > > Why does this patch add a new config file rather than referring to
> > > powerpc/config and powerpc/config.powerpc64?
> >
> > Well, I used the same files as powerpc port for the time being.
> > I think that the same file should be indicated if it is necessary to
> > be managed as the same one for easiness.
> > And I also think that a different file should be indicated if the
> > possibility to be managed as another file is left.
> > This may be likely to discuss it.
>
> It would still be possible to override config options. But I think
> ppc64/powerpc64 should be the same as powerpc/powerpc64. (Just as
> amd64/amd64 is the same as i386/amd64, and sparc64/sparc64 is the same
> as sparc/sparc64.)

Please try the attached patch. This avoids the duplication of config
files or rules in debian/rules.real. It also uses the flavour name
'powerpc64' rather than 'ppc64', matching the name used on powerpc.
This should make any future multiarch transition for powerpc users a
little smoother.

Ben.

--
Ben Hutchings
Once a job is fouled up, anything done to improve it makes it worse.
 
Old 03-21-2011, 10:47 AM
Hiroyuki Yamamoto
 
Default Bug#618976: Please support ppc64

Hi,

(2011-03-21 20:39 +0000), Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Sun, 2011-03-20 at 13:18 +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote:
>>>> Why does this patch add a new config file rather than referring to
>>>> powerpc/config and powerpc/config.powerpc64?
>>>
>>> Well, I used the same files as powerpc port for the time being.
>>> I think that the same file should be indicated if it is necessary to
>>> be managed as the same one for easiness.
>>> And I also think that a different file should be indicated if the
>>> possibility to be managed as another file is left.
>>> This may be likely to discuss it.
>>
>> It would still be possible to override config options. But I think
>> ppc64/powerpc64 should be the same as powerpc/powerpc64. (Just as
>> amd64/amd64 is the same as i386/amd64, and sparc64/sparc64 is the same
>> as sparc/sparc64.)
>
> Please try the attached patch. This avoids the duplication of config
> files or rules in debian/rules.real. It also uses the flavour name
> 'powerpc64' rather than 'ppc64', matching the name used on powerpc.
> This should make any future multiarch transition for powerpc users a
> little smoother.

Thanks for your patch.

I tried it, and I confirmed it to be no problem.
I attach the full patch that I tried.

Regards,
--
Hiroyuki Yamamoto
A75D B285 7050 4BF9 AEDA 91AC 3A10 59C6 5203 04DC
 
Old 03-21-2011, 12:04 PM
Ben Hutchings
 
Default Bug#618976: Please support ppc64

On Mon, 2011-03-21 at 20:47 +0900, Hiroyuki Yamamoto wrote:
> Hi,
>
> (2011-03-21 20:39 +0000), Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > On Sun, 2011-03-20 at 13:18 +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> >>>> Why does this patch add a new config file rather than referring to
> >>>> powerpc/config and powerpc/config.powerpc64?
> >>>
> >>> Well, I used the same files as powerpc port for the time being.
> >>> I think that the same file should be indicated if it is necessary to
> >>> be managed as the same one for easiness.
> >>> And I also think that a different file should be indicated if the
> >>> possibility to be managed as another file is left.
> >>> This may be likely to discuss it.
> >>
> >> It would still be possible to override config options. But I think
> >> ppc64/powerpc64 should be the same as powerpc/powerpc64. (Just as
> >> amd64/amd64 is the same as i386/amd64, and sparc64/sparc64 is the same
> >> as sparc/sparc64.)
> >
> > Please try the attached patch. This avoids the duplication of config
> > files or rules in debian/rules.real. It also uses the flavour name
> > 'powerpc64' rather than 'ppc64', matching the name used on powerpc.
> > This should make any future multiarch transition for powerpc users a
> > little smoother.
>
> Thanks for your patch.
>
> I tried it, and I confirmed it to be no problem.

OK, then I'll apply it.

Ben.

> I attach the full patch that I tried.
>
> Regards,

--
Ben Hutchings
Once a job is fouled up, anything done to improve it makes it worse.
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 07:50 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org