Re: Release plans for potato/m68k?
On Mon, 4 Oct 1999, Michael Schmitz wrote:
> > With the potato freeze date approaching rapidly, I'm beggining to wonder
> > about our plans for the m68k port in the next release. Specifically:
> >
> > 1) What version of libc will we be going with?
>
> 2.1 I thought, but Roman is the one to comment on that. We'd be on our own
> with all the minimal library stuff on the boot floppies in case we stay on
> 2.0...
We are still at 2.0, the only real problem I see now is a dependency problem
with locales...
Who tested glibc2.1 for m68k, I mean really tested it? I dont remember
seeing any reports...
(Maybe we can test in Oldenburg? I should really try to bring my machine.)
> Support for Amiga, Atari and VME was in the 2.1.9 boot floppies. I've never
> seen hp300 support code. The way the boot-floppies package is (was) set up
> it will build rescue and driver images for all supported machines automagically
> and package the release files into tar or lha archives. lha is evil (or so I
> heard) and may not be accepted anymore but I had added the tar option before
lha is still _the_ standard packer for Amiga... but I guess that problem
will resurface...
How about: Short: TGZ - Tar Archiver and GZIP in one Script
Hmm, freeware, but with restriction...
Of course we can switch to Geek Gadgets software, which is as free as it can
be, but then well need additional libraries installed just to unpack this
one archive...
Do we have to unpack the archive? On the CD it can be unpacked, on the ftp
server, it can be tgz and we give some hints where to find unpacking
software? Works, but makes things a little uncomfortable for the user.
How is it working for DOS, are they using ZIP? Are they allowed to use ZIP?
There is unzip for Amiga, too... but not so common.
> The base.tgz is the same for all machines anyway (or should be), and the
It really is? Astonishing, I thought it contained some binaries... they are
in root.bin?
> rescue/drivers build doesn't take all that much time per machine. I
> volunteer to test the install procedure on Atari, and maybe we can coax
> Christian to do the same on Amiga. Nick Holgate probably is the only one
> with VME around?
Sure I´ll make a testinstall, I can even burn test CDs (if somebody tells
me what scripts to use or points me to the images). If anybody wants to join
the tests in germany...
> So I guess what I say is: do we need multiple builders at all? Building
> Amiga and Atari and VME sets wasn't much of an overhead for me. I assume
> that nothing broke since the 2.1 release, of course. And I haven't followed
> the fantasies about graphical install etc. anymore.
Didnt we push Chris L. into this? ;-)
> Disclaimer: I've never built kernel packages the Right Way. Unpack some
> other kernel package, replace kernel, modules and doc and repack with a new
> name was easier.
I did, I didnt find it too intuitive, I hope I still find my notes. The
latest kernel I got to work is 2.2.10 though, and I am not too sure about
virge patches in that kernel, I allways had to undo parts of them to get it
booting on my machine. I didnt try 2.3 or 2.2.x (x > 10) yet... so which 2.2
would we use, _if_ we switch to 2.2?
I can hear James screaming allready, jumping out of the window... changeing
gcc to egcs, libc6 2.0 to 2.1 _and_ the kernel to 2.2 just a few days before
the freeze? QA in industry would not allow that, I fear.
BTW, did I tell that xfree has to be built with gcc272 to work? I wouldnt
wonder if more such surprises are waiting for us if we switch glibc _now_.
And who is really testing all the packages we are building?
Ciao,
Christian.
--
Read the FAQ! http://www.linux-m68k.org/faq/faq.html
Download the FAQ! ftp://ftp.uni-erlangen.de/pub/Linux/680x0/FAQ/FAQ.gz
Reply to: