[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [GSoC 2013] MIPS N32/N64 ABI port project

On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 10:58 AM, Matt Turner <mattst88@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 7:37 PM, Aron Xu <happyaron.xu@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 10:10 AM, Matt Turner <mattst88@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I'll copy-and-paste what I said to the other guy who suggested an N32
>>> Debian port (on March 1, check the archives for the full thread):
>>> Disclaimer: I'm not a Debian developer or even a user.
>>> I am, however, a Gentoo/MIPS developer who completed our n32 port.
>>> There were some annoying bits, like packages that hardcode 'lib', but
>>> overall it's not a difficult task. Other distributions are already
>>> n32, so there's not much if any package porting to do.
>>> The scope of this project would be entirely within Debian, getting
>>> Debian's infrastructure going for n32. I don't personally think that's
>>> a SoC project, but I don't know. Maybe a Debian/n32 port involves lots
>>> of work I don't know about, but for Gentoo it was mostly recompile a
>>> bunch of stuff and fix things that break. IIRC, I was *terribly*
>>> unimpressed with the 2009 Port Debian to N32 project. It was just a
>>> recompile everything and see what breaks endeavor, which is what other
>>> people have done with much more success (see: Gentoo, Parabola).
>> I don't quite get the point why do you think others have done "with
>> much more success" when this project isn't started anyway.
> Read the blog of the guy who tried to do this project in 2009:
> http://sandyleo26.wordpress.com/2009/04/05/gsoc-proposal-creating-a-new-mips-n32-abi-port-for-debian/
> Gentoo and Parabola have working n32 ports. People use them. That's
> much more success than the previous N32 GSoC project (and I suppose
> any n32 work since then). Maybe this is actually an argument for doing
> an N32 port?

If this project gets done, people use this as well. I'm not involved
in that GSoC project anyway, nor any prospective students this year,
so your comparison isn't fair at all.

>> It's really
>> not simply recompiling everything because of the presence of real-life
>> Multi-Arch, and actually recompiling everything isn't even a required
>> task in the project's description.
> My experience porting Gentoo to N32 was bootstrapping my an N32 base
> system, finding and fixing bugs, and finally building installation
> media. I don't feel like there was enough actual development in what I
> did to warrant a GSoC project.
> But I'm not a Debian developer or user, so maybe I don't know what is
> required for Debian. What would your deliverables be?

Bootstrapping a working environment is easy, but we'd like to make use
of Multiarch cross-build approach, which is also a verification of
existing GSoC works in past years. As said in the projects page this
project's primary target is to make N64 port, and N32 being an
optional item. This means at least two ports will get bootstrapped
(n64 el/non-el), and it can grow up to four (+ n32 el/non-el) if the
we (or rather, the student) can manage to do that. Deliverable in this
project is written in the wiki page and can be updated when there are
good ideas.

Aron Xu

Reply to: