Re: Dropping sparc32 for lenny
Jurij Smakov wrote:
Now that we have released, we need to set our goals for the future. As
you probably guessed from the subject, I am strongly in favor of
dropping sparc32 support for lenny. There are multiple reasons for it,
* Nearly complete lack of upstream support. David Miller, current
upstream maintainer of sparc64 has expressed his thoughts on the
topic in , triggering the discussion about dropping sparc32
support in Aurora Linux. 
* Several serious problems, like lack of SMP support and driver
failures (CD-ROMs do not work for some reason).
* Shrinking userbase, flaky hardware.
* Possibility to build the archive with optimization for UltraSparc
processors, leading in some cases to significant performance
As much as I hate to see Debian lose the support for another
subarchitecture, I don't think that anything can be done about it,
unless a group of determined and, more importantly, capable people,
willing to maintain, fix and test it, will emerge. There is also a
possibility of separating sparc32 into an unofficial project.
Any thoughts on the matter will be appreciated. My intention is to
come to a rough consensus (if possible), and then present our plan
with regards to sparc32 to release managers.
Why can't you have official sparc32 and sparc64 ports?
That way you can optimize sparc64 and still have sparc32 support.