Re: Bug#154179: Please create binary-sh and remove binary-sh
2009/6/20 Luca Bruno <firstname.lastname@example.org>:
> [Sorry for the long CC: list, I was unsure about subscribers]
> So, even if this report is quite old, it looks like something is
> currently moving.
> This mail is just to ping all interested parties and sum up relevant
> In a recent thread, there were initial discussions about first
> integrating sh4 into debian-ports, also to ease a future move into
> the official archive. Buildd and porters hardware is reported to be
> available, but it looks to me that the issue is currently related to
> lack of manpower and people involved.
> Porters, commenters and SH fans, would you please speak up and
> coordinate initial setup with Aurelien?
Mr, Yaegashi, Mr, Ishikawa and Mr. Niibe are the first proposers who were
going to support SH in Debian.
This was performed very before.
There were sh3/sh4 and two architecture and an endian in those days.
I suggested sh3 + kernel math emuration to support sh3 two years ago.
However, sh3 is still produced now,; but central sh4.
And the new CPU of sh3 is not developed.
And sh3/sh4 is bi-endian, but most of big-endian is not employed.
I reopened activity with an aim in supporting little endian of sh4.
> Also, it would be good to have general-use knowledge about this port
> available on the wiki, as it's already happening with other ports
> . While digging the archive, I found many links to Japan
> documentations and pages: I think you could try to attract more
> contributors just providing more plain English docs.
I made a page of SH4 port.
However, these are not yet enough.
> While at it, can we consider consensus reached to start just with sh4,
> ask for binary-sh removal and then if requested try to add other
> flavors (having learned and gained experience from the past)?
I think it to have possibilities to delete binary-sh as had written on the top.
However, I want to hear the opinion of other people.