Re: Creation of Sparc (32-bit) port.
On Tue, 2007-08-21 at 17:41 -0400, Clint Adams wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 21, 2007 at 12:39:16AM +0100, Martin wrote:
> > As far as I know nothing has happened for precisely the same reason that
> > sparc32 had to be dropped - there isn't anyone to work on the kernel.
> > Without that then a separate port isn't going to get too far, but if
> > there was some one / some people who were willing to work on it, there
> > wouldn't need to be a separate port...
>
> Actually, there would be unless you add additional CPU emulation to
> Linux.
Sorry - I don't follow. Presumably you are making reference to
emulating the few instructions that are in SPARC V9 but not in SPARC V8.
In my opinion that's a fairly minor issue. Last I looked the sparc
binaries were being built for V8 and the libraries in which it would
make an appreciable difference have V9 versions available.
Essentially /if/ there was someone who was willing to handle kernel
development for sparc32, things could (more or less) continue as they
have been. At least, that's my impression.
> Chris is suggesting the only viable option.
I don't think so, see above. The one port / two kernel approach has
been working well, an extra port seems unnecessary.
Cheers,
- Martin
Reply to: