skrll@ wrote: > On 07/21/14 06:49, Izumi Tsutsui wrote: > > matt@ wrote: > > > >>> For the next release, core/releng should decide per current > >>> implementation: > >>> - how the default userland MACHINE_ARCH should be deteremined > >> What do you mean by default? > > "What (and how) MACHINE_ARCH should releng (binary builders) specify > > for each arm port on NetBSD 7.0 release?" > > Personally, I hope we'll see builds for most (probably no need for v[67] > sf) MACHINE_ARCH values. As matt said the RPI needs all the help it can > get :)
releng already says we don't have enough resources. > > > >>> - how to handle migration from old ABI to new one on sysinst > >> In essence, this is no different from upgrading an i386 userland to an > >> amd64 userland. > > So, your answer is > > "We will never prepare such upgrade path" > > right? > > I don't know how you got from Matt's statement to your question. I think > there are solutions here. Where? There is no upgrade path from i386 to amd64 in sysinst. (we only had a.out to ELF) > > > >>> - which MACHINE_ARCH binaries should be prepared for official packages > >>> etc. for the new MACHINE_ARCH strategies. > >> I have not seen an ARMv6 or ARMv7 machine without floating point yet. > > It doesn't answer the question at all. > > > > The question is "which MACHINE_ARCH". > > I think the answer is "the best one for your hardware". I'm asking about "for official packages", not mine. --- Izumi Tsutsui
