Re: armel after Stretch (was: Summary of the ARM ports BoF at DC16)
On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 11:19:34AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 1:40 AM, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>
> > One way in which the need to keep armel around would be reduced is if we
> > could somehow upgrade from armel machines to armhf ones, without
> > requiring a reinstall.
>
> There is a script for that here:
>
> https://wiki.debian.org/CrossGrading
Yes, but that still says:
A full backup is also strongly recommended as this procedure is still very
much work in progress. Reinstalling is still the safer option. You have
been warned!
I think a proper procedure should involve a script that:
- is packaged in Debian;
- checks whether the hardware it's running on has all the hardware
requirements for the new architecture (i.e., in case of armel to
armhf, can support the ARM ABI required by armhf; or in case of i386
to amd64, is a processor that supports the x86_64 ABI), and produces a
proper error message in case the required support isn't there;
- is properly tested to work in (almost) all situations;
- is a properly supported way to move from one ABI to another.
We currently don't have anything remotely like the above, and I think we
should.
[1] save that, I think, at the time multiarch didn't exist yet. Yes,
this was an "interesting" experience :-)
--
< ron> I mean, the main *practical* problem with C++, is there's like a dozen
people in the world who think they really understand all of its rules,
and pretty much all of them are just lying to themselves too.
-- #debian-devel, OFTC, 2016-02-12
Reply to: