Re: Status of d-i kernel transition for 2.6.14
On Wed, Dec 07, 2005 at 09:46:39PM -0600, Stephen R Marenka wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 08, 2005 at 12:37:06PM +1100, Finn Thain wrote:
> > On Wed, 7 Dec 2005, Ingo Juergensmann wrote:
> 2.2.25 is the only kernel that realiably works with a keyboard on
> All the other m68k subarchs supposedly work with 2.4.27. I don't know of
> any that have no issues with 2.6.
It's true that 2.4 was never supported on m68k/mac. Even 2.6 is better.
For the most part, 2.4 was ignored by all of us working on mac support,
although some work was done in 2.4 to add support for some of the 68k
> > I'm hoping that the Quadra 840 AV and Quadra 660 AV would be future
> > candidates for a qualifying a 2.6 kernel that could be considered stable.
> > This is because 840 AV was the fastest production model, Christian has
> > one, and the problems on those machines appear to be relatively tractable.
> > But I'm afraid I can't hazard a guess as to a timeframe on this.
> I'm the primary d-i developer and I have a quadra 650 and two 950s.
> Until one of those runs 2.6 (d-i requires a working keyboard to really
> be useful) or atari (aranym) gets fixed, I can't really do much.
Those two Mac models are actually some of the worst ones for being
supported. The Q650 has the old MacII style ADB which has been
pretty unreliable in recent times. The Q950 has IOP ADB, which works
just fine on a IIfx, but the code for the IOP chips really only gets
tested on the IIfx (that's all JMT and I had when we did that code
originally). It's been known to fail on the Q900 and Q950. The Q650
is pretty common, so hopefully we can get that working pretty easily.
The only 68k Mac I've been able to run with 2.6 is a IIfx, and even
that was only after the NCR5380 driver got fixed. I believe I have
at least one Mac using each ADB driver, so hopefully I can do some
real testing on that after I get some other stuff fixed. The Q840AV
is another good choice due to the performance and being more like
some of the pmac hardware.