| 1 |
On 10 Feb 2004, at 23:05, Brad House wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
>> Zisofs does not work on ppc |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
One of the reasons for the creation of a 2004.0/ppc sneak preview |
| 6 |
release was to give the genkernel team some time to implement gcloop |
| 7 |
compression in catalyst, this is no longer a ppc requirement for 2004.0 |
| 8 |
since we have a recent kde/gnome cd now. Zisofs being ppc incompatible |
| 9 |
has been mentioned before on both this list and on a gentoo meeting on |
| 10 |
which the requirements for catalyst were discussed. I only contributed |
| 11 |
verbally to the requirement document for genkernel, and did not write |
| 12 |
the actual document, I wasn't asked to approve/check it either, in fact |
| 13 |
I haven't seen one. Please note that the genkernel SRS writer included |
| 14 |
'pvdabeel should know' in his notes. I'm not the one to blame if nobody |
| 15 |
asks me, or takes into account my remarks. It is clear there was an |
| 16 |
issue with genkernel requirements , holding back ppc, and I solved it. |
| 17 |
Shouldn't we all be happy about it? |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
The ppc team is completely kosher with current genkernel for 2004.0, we |
| 20 |
were however due to time and manpower constraints (this included |
| 21 |
building a sneak preview) unable to commit our stuff as fast as the |
| 22 |
others, something which you described as non-kosher ("we -refused- to |
| 23 |
commit", rather than "we are -unable- to commit", do you see the |
| 24 |
difference?). My email described why we were unable to commit as fast |
| 25 |
as the other architectures. There's no reason to be paranoid about it: |
| 26 |
Genkernel will get its much requested ppc profile, but everything at |
| 27 |
the right time. We are busy, busy, busy... |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
I have addressed ppc64 with Tom Gall on irc, I was hoping we could do |
| 30 |
the same, hence my numerous requests (2nd of february). What I require |
| 31 |
to happen between ppc32 and ppc64 is coordination. I don't want to see |
| 32 |
anything that prevents coordination, and we clearly have started out in |
| 33 |
an incorrect way. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
I'm glad to hear (finally) that ppc64 will do livecd support by the end |
| 36 |
of this month. ppc will most likely wait with integrating ppc32 livecd |
| 37 |
support until you're finished then, to avoid duplicating efforts (think |
| 38 |
linuxrc rather than kernel .configs). I find it rather annoying that |
| 39 |
you're not able to answer this simple question much sooner, and am |
| 40 |
happy I will be able to fall back on your (so far excellent) genkernel |
| 41 |
work at the end of this month. Again, this will allow me to invest more |
| 42 |
time in other gentoo aspects. |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
I am not being sarcasting about genkernel documentation or genkernel |
| 45 |
code, I know how annoying initrd creation can be. I wrote on the second |
| 46 |
of february that catalyst lacks good livecd documentation, genkernel on |
| 47 |
the contrary is an excellent example of how it should be done. There |
| 48 |
are more comments in there than code :-) Please let us start working |
| 49 |
together in a professional context. |
| 50 |
|
| 51 |
> /me feels another flame war coming on. |
| 52 |
|
| 53 |
I don't see why that would help gentoo? |
| 54 |
|
| 55 |
Please note that I have updated my documents to include ppc64 in the |
| 56 |
ppc scope. I will be very flexible about ppc64, but I require you to |
| 57 |
use your coordination capabilities to communicate with ppc32, if you're |
| 58 |
intending on leading that subproject. |
| 59 |
|
| 60 |
Best regards, |
| 61 |
|
| 62 |
Pieter Van den Abeele |
| 63 |
|
| 64 |
|
| 65 |
-- |
| 66 |
gentoo-releng@g.o mailing list |
Archives