Re: question for ARM porters: incomplete arm v3 support in etch?
On Fri, Oct 27, 2006 at 09:50:44PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Bug #394418 is a report filed regarding a recurring build problem with mono
> on arm that results from mono generating code that's incompatible with the
> arm v3 instruction set. Likewise, it appears shadow fails to build on elara
> (one of the netwinder buildds) due to an illegal instruction from xsltproc,
> but not on the newer buildds.
>
> I'm inclined to tag 394418 etch-ignore, because most of the arm buildds (all
> of the faster ones) are capable of handling newer instruction sets, and the
> autobuilder for stable-security on arm is among those that can. But before
> I do that, I want to confirm: do the ARM porters consider this reasonable?
> Should support for arm v3 systems be considered release-critical on this
> architecture? And if so, is someone available to work on fixing mono's code
> generation, or would mono need to be dropped from arm for etch?
No objections.
AFAICT, the popularity of Debian/ARM is due to the recent crop of
IXP42x's. The oldest hardware that I have is ARM720, which is also
v4.
OTOH, we've carried 386 for a long time and there are so few of those
around anymore. I'd prefer not worrying about the v3 machines, but
our policy tends to be inclusive.
Reply to: