Re: Bug#67888: marked as done ([CVS-fixed] Netwinder/arm port shouldn't ask about maintaining 2.0 compatability)
Wookey <wookey@aleph1.co.uk> writes:
> On Thu 23 Nov, Adam Di Carlo wrote:
> > Wookey <wookey@aleph1.co.uk> writes:
>
> > > On Tue 21 Nov, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
>
> > > > >From andersen@codepoet.org Sat Jul 29 01:11:08 2000
> > > > Return-path: <andersen@codepoet.org>
>
> > > > The debian installer for potato worked just fine on the netwinder, one
> > > > I convinced it to tftp boot the provided netwinder-rescue image. One
> > > > hitch though -- the question about maintaining 2.0 compatability for
> > > > the ext2 fs should be removed and forced to "yes". Answering "no"
> > > > causes the netwinder's firmware (which is just a stripped down linux
> > > > kernel) to be unable to read the filesystem -- so it is unable to boot
> > > > the system. Not that big a deal though.
>
> > Could you file this as a bug?
>
> erm, are you confused adam? The above para has already been filed as
> a bug and you replied saying it was fixed in bf2.2.17 (see below -
> it was this message that I replied to). That's all fine so far as I
> can tell. Or do you mean I should file the fact that this causes
> (may cause?) a different problem for RiscPC as a bug?
Yes, the different problem.
> > You'd have to ask the ARM porters. Other arches with subarches (such as
> > sparc) look in /proc/cpuinfo and such and automatically deal with this.
>
> I _am_ the ARM porters :-). Well, it's not quite that bad, but I'm
> one of a very few people working on bf for ARM. I take your point
> that it is better to check this at runtime if possible and take
> appropriate action than to make different boot-floppies sets, where
> possible. I was just wondering whether there was official bf policy
> on how to deal with subarches so that things remained
> consistent. I'll check out the code and get it to use /proc/cpuinfo
> if appropriate.
Taking as an example how powerpc and sparc and m68k do this is the
best guide.
--
.....Adam Di Carlo....adam@onShore.com.....<URL:http://www.onShore.com/>
Reply to: