Le vendredi 14 août 2026, 10:48:07 heure d’été d’Europe centrale John Paul Adrian Glaubitz a écrit : > On Thu, 2026-08-13 at 15:09 +0200, Bastien Roucaries wrote: > > Le jeudi 13 août 2026, 13:00:41 heure d’été d’Europe centrale John Paul > > Adrian Glaubitz a écrit : > > > Hi Bastien, > > > > > > On Thu, 2026-08-13 at 12:53 +0200, Bastien Roucaries wrote: > > > > In order to ease the user/devel experience I want for isa-support to > > > > create test for forky baseline > > > > I forget to add my goal, the goal is to create a forky package > > forky-isa-support and backport it as last PU before release. > > > > Therefore user could do apt install forky-isa-support and it will fail if > > upgrade is not supported. > > > > Better user experience > > OK, but that still means breaking existing usecases.
Yes but a least upgrade could fail early instead of broken semi install. > > > > > > > > For now I test for armhf: > > > > > > > > armv8-support > > > > CPU feature checking - require ARMv8 > > > > > > > > neon-support > > > > > > Not sure I understand this. You want to raise armhf to ARMv8? Why would > > > anyone then install a 32-bit port when they could just use the 64-bit > > > port in the first place? > > > > Some packages need it, I agree with you about arm7 it is only for > > completeness. > > If you want to raise baseline ask for more test > > The decisions to determine the baseline should not be aligned whether some > packages need it or not but whether the final product will be usable by > end users. > > Please don't look at the build results on the buildds. We're not building > a distribution for the sake of building one but for delivering a product > that people will use. > > > > > > > > For armhf/arm64 (will like to know if it exist supported cpu without > > > > crc) > > > > > > > > armv8crc-support > > > > CPU feature checking - require ARMv8CRC > > > > > > What's the advantage of requiring ARMv8CRC? > > > > Some package need it to me best knownelge for arm64 except one card every > > cpu has crc. > > That's not an argument. If I have an ARMv8-capable machine, I'm not going > to install Debian's armhf port. That makes no sense. Not amrv8CRC is for arm64 also > > > > > > > > For amd64/i386 (i will like to only use psABI defintion so > > > > > > > > sse3-support > > > > vérification de caractéristique de CPU – besoin de SSE3 > > > > sse4.1-support > > > > CPU feature checking - require SSE4.1 > > > > sse4.2-support > > > > SSE4.2 > > > > x86-64-v2-support > > > > CPU feature checking - require x86-64-v2 > > > > x86-64-v3-support > > > > CPU feature checking - require x86-64-v3 > > > > > > Isn't that something that should be done using hwcaps support? > > > > Yes but some upstream are require sse3 Yes and they should be ported to SIMDEverywhere https://wiki.debian.org/SIMDEverywhere and use hwcaps and bonus point portable to other arch rouca > > See above, not an argument. > > > > > for ppc/ppc64 > > > > > > > > altivec-support > > > > > > POWER8 already has AltiVec. > > > > So I could drop for ppc ? > > Not sure what you mean with "ppc" here. Please be more precise. > > We have: > > - powerpc > - ppc64 > - ppc64el > > > > Adrian > >
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
