Re: Bug#154179: Please create binary-sh and remove binary-sh
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 23:15, Nobuhiro Iwamatsu<email@example.com> wrote:
> 2009/6/22 Bill Traynor <firstname.lastname@example.org>:
>>> I made a page of SH4 port.
>> Is your page different from the link here:
>> http://debian.org/ports/#unreleased which points back to
> I'll second that.
>>> 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)?
>> What justifies SH4 first? Is there a particular piece of hardware
>> based on SH4 that your interested in running DebianSH on? I don't
>> particularly care what variant you target first, but I'm curious why.
> I do not have a particularly big reason.
> If there is a reason, the reason is because I do not have a board of sh3.
> And I think the user to have more sh4 than sh3.
Fair enough, those are good enough reasons.
> Do you want to support sh3?
I'd love too, but alas, cannot at present. However, as time allows, I
may attempt to pick this up or at the very least contribute. The only
SH3 based hardware I own is a Jornada 690 though.
I guess the bigger questions would be "why bother?" Given the limited
number of Linux hackers I know of working on SuperH as it is, spending
time on support for newer hardware would seem wiser.
> If it is so, I will participate so in development with pleasure.
> Best regards,
> Nobuhiro Iwamatsu