Re: ARMEL in Buster CPU_Tag, instruction set
On Sat, Jul 27, 2019 at 1:18 AM Dick Hollenbeck wrote:
> In either case a policy statement seems to be needed. Was this an oops or was it
> deliberate? (Why deliberately make an architecture which is attempting to support old ARM
> CPUs NOT support old ARM CPUs?)
BTW, there is a project called that rebootstrap might be able to help
you reduce the baseline of armel back to 4T. It aims to make it easier
and more automatic to build new architectures from scratch. The idea
would be to define a new architecture with the old baseline, then
cross-build enough of build-essential for the new arch, then either
natively or cross build all the other packages that your project
needs, ignoring things like Firefox. The downside of this approach is
the setup of new infrastructure, that you have to rebuild security
updates, plus that the status of rebootstrap & cross-building for
buster might not be enough for your purposes. It might be simpler to
just upgrade to a newer ARM CPU. Either way, here are some links that
you might be interested in:
https://wiki.debian.org/HelmutGrohne/rebootstrap
http://crossqa.debian.net/
https://wiki.debian.org/CrossCompiling
--
bye,
pabs
https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
Reply to: