1 |
On 05/06/2014 09:10 AM, Joshua Kinard wrote: |
2 |
> On 05/06/2014 03:07, Markos Chandras wrote: |
3 |
>> @kumba: You mentioned too many times that I wanted to "drop" support for |
4 |
>> mips3 and mips4. I never said that (I am sort-of tired keep repeating |
5 |
>> that). All I said (again) was to reduce the frequency or stop building |
6 |
>> them at all. Users can still get an existing mips3/mips4 stage3 and |
7 |
>> update themselves |
8 |
> |
9 |
> Maybe it's just my way of interpretation, but in your opening paragraph, |
10 |
> even though you said we wouldn't drop support, you did suggest not creating |
11 |
> new stages for mips1-mips4. |
12 |
> |
13 |
> Given a sufficiently long-enough time, that effectively drops support due to |
14 |
> bitrot. Like I mentioned w/ the 2009-era userland on this Octane, I am not |
15 |
> going to even try to update that, simply due to the amount of time it would |
16 |
> take, even if I figure the IRQ prioritization bugs out. |
17 |
> |
18 |
> So, my apologies if I read it wrong, but that's just how I see it. |
19 |
> |
20 |
> |
21 |
>> (picking up a random thread) |
22 |
>> |
23 |
>> Ok thanks for the replies. |
24 |
>> |
25 |
>> Ok I think it's safe to proceed with the following: |
26 |
>> - Stop mips1 builds (we don't have mips2) |
27 |
> |
28 |
> I'll defer to Matt to chime in to my last message and correct me anymore, if |
29 |
> needed, but, I think we'll want to keep either a mips1 or a mips2, but not |
30 |
> both. As well as decide whether it's a full stage3 or just a simple |
31 |
> stage1/stage2 tarball so people have a base from which to start a port to a |
32 |
> new MIPS machine if needed. That can get updated once a year, especially if |
33 |
> it's a stage1 which shouldn't take long at all. |
34 |
|
35 |
I see no value for mips1 or mips2 so feel free to pick these up. Even if |
36 |
someone is using them as bootstrap, then *any* mips1 stage3 would do. |
37 |
|
38 |
> |
39 |
> |
40 |
>> - Reduce the frequency to once-a-year for mips3 and mips4. Updating |
41 |
>> these stages every year with catalyst will be a lot of fun ;) |
42 |
> |
43 |
> NAK, At least once every 6 months, and preferably shortly after the .1 |
44 |
> release of a new major gcc rev, given gcc's absurd compile time now. Gentoo |
45 |
> moves fast, and a lot can change in a year. |
46 |
|
47 |
Forgive me but this almost sounds like an order :) This is not going to |
48 |
happen, sorry :) I don't want to become a build robot and spend all my |
49 |
Gentoo/MIPS time doing stages. With the introduction of new ISAs, the |
50 |
total number of stages will grow even more, and like i explained |
51 |
multiple times, this does not scale. There are other parts of the |
52 |
architecture that needs some love too and right now I have no time for both. |
53 |
|
54 |
And you haven't really convinced me why mips4 is desired, when mips3 can |
55 |
run just fine on mips4 hardware. I think you need to be realist, and |
56 |
take into consideration, not just your personal needs, but also the time |
57 |
it actually takes to build and maintain all these stages. I explained |
58 |
that so many times already, I am not going to do that again. |
59 |
As Anthony said, mipsel3 is used by lemote, so keeping it alive is |
60 |
probably a good thing (though the newer hardware is mips64 capable) |
61 |
|
62 |
> |
63 |
> Otherwise, just e-mail me your mips3/mips4/mips4_r10 spec files, any custom |
64 |
> tweaks/changes to catalyst, and any specific instructions you do |
65 |
> before/during/after a catalyst build and I'll put the O2 to work if needed. |
66 |
> |
67 |
|
68 |
There is nothing special about my spec files and I do nothing special in |
69 |
catalyst so feel free to pick up the mips3 and mips4 stages. If you are |
70 |
having troubles with catalyst email the gentoo-catalyst@ ML. That might |
71 |
actually be a good way for you to become active again ;) |
72 |
|
73 |
-- |
74 |
Regards, |
75 |
Markos Chandras |