On Tue, 20 May 2025, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> > And I really don't want to keep patching stuff forever manually and > upload it to Debian unreleased. It's a pure waste of time which is > better spent on fixing actual bugs. > As I pointed out years ago, you need to stop wasting effort on packages that aren't relevant anymore, due to bloat. I've also pointed out before that there is plenty of scope for novel tools to automatically identify the kind of pointer abuse that you are apparently unwilling to work on. > I really don't understand why people that claim to be interested in the > m68k port constantly block any kind of changes that would actually > improve the port and prepare it for the future. > And here's another thing you need to understand: there is no future for a port that has no porter willing to identify relevant packages and send patches upstream. But, if it's not already dead, you will kill Debian/m68k if you break the ABI contract. Nevermind removing that characteristic which provides it with a unique advantage, being a smaller memory and cache footprint. And before you get upset, I'm not saying this is your fault. The demands of your distro apparently don't match the demands of the platform. Nothing new there for microcontrollers. Try to see the big picture. All ports will suffer the same fate as this one: fewer users, commercial irrelevance, reluctant contributors and bloated packages. The relevance of m68k is now the way in which we respond to those challenges. If the best that any port can hope for is ABI breakage, we've failed. One does not age gracefully by pretending to be young. m68k does not contribute anything by becoming the same as every other 32-bit big-endian platform.
