Re: Debian for SuperH bootstrapping
Hi,
At Sun, 30 Dec 2001 11:49:45 +0100,
Martin Schulze wrote:
> Oliver M . Bolzer wrote:
> > So, how would the members of the debian-suoerh list order
> > sh3, sh4, sh3eb, sh4eb according to importance and number of potential users?
> > Then we can debate how many and which subarchitectures we compile and
> > distribute.
>
> And the sh port lacks proper maintenance at the moment, it seems. Out of
> 17 binary packages that I maintain, 7 seem to be outdated on superh, these
> are small packages without gcc problems on ia64/hppa, which would be more
> crucial. Hence, before considering more Debian architectures for SuperH
> I'd ask for more manpower to push the current port. :)
Yes, I know that sh port isn't maintained very well. The main reason
for it is exactly this confusion about sh* architectures.
All the binary-sh archives of Debian has been built and uploaded by
ISHIKAWA Mutsumi. But he has stopped it this autumn because the
current architecture scheme turned out problematic.
Once we settle the problem and have migrated to the new scheme, he
would resume the buildd process, and some other poeple (including me)
would join that effort. I'm convinced that we could offer better
maintenance of sh port.
> Also, there is no /ports/superh/ on www.debian.org. That's also something
> I'd ask for, proper documentation of the port... I'm willing to add things
> if people send me plain text which can be put there. I don't know enough
> about this port to write up something on my own, though.
Thanks. I'd like to prepare some documentation for it if possible.
--
YAEGASHI Takeshi <t@keshi.org> <takeshi@yaegashi.jp> <yaegashi@dodes.org>
Reply to: