On 2016-12-07 15:53 +0000, Steve McIntyre wrote: > On Wed, Dec 07, 2016 at 08:50:40PM +0900, Roger Shimizu wrote: > >I'm ARM porter on armel/marvell (orion5x/kirkwood). > >Stretch will be frozen and released soon, which makes me bit depressed, > >because it means armel will be dropped out of unstable/testing as the > >conclusion of Cape Town BoF. > > > >> Possible future options for armel: > >> > >> * Partial armel architecture? > >> > >> We've talked about this in the past for various architectures, but > >> nobody has stepped up to work on it. The vast majority of the > >> outstanding armel use cases are going to be in headless servers so > >> we could maybe drop the desktop tasks and dependencies and keep > >> things like web server / mail server tasks that are much simpler. > >> Downside: There's no clear plan for how to create/maintain a > >> partial architecture, let alone how to release one. Potentially > >> huge amount of work needed. We can do poor-mans partial arch by just being fairly agressive about disabling armel for packages that are broken or not suitable. Not very clever or efficient, but it is easy to do and requires no infra or tooling changes at all. So long as someone is volunteering for that (easy but unexciting) work that could work. Obviously something fancier and more centralised/general would be 'better' but it requires a different skill-set and realistically will probably take a long time. Wookey -- Principal hats: Linaro, Debian, Wookware, ARM http://wookware.org/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature