Re: Sarge may be last Debian release for 32 bit sparc systems
On Wed, 7 Sep 2005, Martin Habets wrote: Sorry to rattle up old dust here... It's fine, as long as it's for a good cause :-). Have you also checked for the filesystem corruption with stock kernels? With what filesystems/disks do you see this? 2.6.10 was still okay, right? To the best of my knowledge, 2.6.10 was the last stable kernel on HyperSPARC machines. The first one which broke for me was 2.6.11-rc2 or -rc3. I don't recall whether I've actually tested vanilla 2.6.12, but we did not have any sparc32-specific patches in Debian at that point. I remember having this issue waay back in the 2.6.0 prereleases. After rearanging the memory according to the official sun documentation it always boots fine. Are you seeing intermittend boot problems, or is it just that you can't plug in the memory anywhere you want? I never experienced problems like that. Bob Breuer wrote in [0] that after rearranging the memory he was able to trigger a failure on a machine which was working reliably before. He said that it might be due to CONFIG_HIGHMEM being set, but disabling it did not improve the situation. I have no problem testing any debian kernels you build, but I normally run stock kernels (usually without problems). I only have a SS20 with a SuperSparc, so I cannot test HyperSparc specific issues. Besides this I don't use initrd, so that's another complication out of the way. The latest kernel I run now is 2.6.10, but will start testing 2.6.13 soon. Please keep the list posted. I have recently moved, so currently I don't have _any_ Sparc machines. This situation is likely to improve within a month or so, but at the moment there are more important things to take care of. Can someone point me to the extra patches included in this debian-kernel SVN thing? I don't know svn, so a web link or a tarball would be best for me. I could inspect these patches once or twice, but have no intention of checking them all the time. You can view the patches online at [1], or by installing the latest patch package, like linux-patch-debian-2.6.12. The patches will then be installed into the /usr/src/kernel-patches/all/2.6.12/debian/ directory. [0] http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-sparc&m=112153109809099&w=2 [1] http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/kernel/dists/trunk/linux-2.6/debian/patches-debian/?rev=0&sc=0 Best regards, Jurij Smakov[EMAIL PROTECTED] Key: http://www.wooyd.org/pgpkey/ KeyID: C99E03CC -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sarge may be last Debian release for 32 bit sparc systems
Sorry to rattle up old dust here... On Mon, Jul 25, 2005 at 09:34:03PM -0400, Jurij Smakov wrote: > >Reportedly, current 2.6 kernels do not work *at all* on sun4m. This > >according to Jurij Smakov, who appears to currently be the sparc kernel > >maintainer in Debian. > > Yes, indeed I could not make it work with neither 2.6.11 or 2.6.12 > kernels. It would not boot with initrd, debugging showed that basic memory > copying routines are broken. Removing initrd support (initial plan > for 2.6.12) actually made it possible to boot, but it did not eliminate > the problems, so I was still occasionally triggering a filesystem > corruption in my tests. In the end we decided not to build the sparc32 > kernel images for 2.6.12 release, so the first step towards dropping it > has already been done. Have you also checked for the filesystem corruption with stock kernels? With what filesystems/disks do you see this? 2.6.10 was still okay, right? > It also appears that the success or failure to boot > is correlated with positions of memory chips in the slots, not really an > acceptable situation. I remember having this issue waay back in the 2.6.0 prereleases. After rearanging the memory according to the official sun documentation it always boots fine. Are you seeing intermittend boot problems, or is it just that you can't plug in the memory anywhere you want? > I am willing to fiddle with kernel options and available patches, but I'm > really not hardcore enough to keep the sparc32 afloat. So unless someone > upstream will start actively working on it again, I see dropping support > for it as inevitable. I have no problem testing any debian kernels you build, but I normally run stock kernels (usually without problems). I only have a SS20 with a SuperSparc, so I cannot test HyperSparc specific issues. Besides this I don't use initrd, so that's another complication out of the way. The latest kernel I run now is 2.6.10, but will start testing 2.6.13 soon. >From the mails it is not clear to me wether the problems you're reported are specific to Hypersparc or not. Do you have any idea on this? Can someone point me to the extra patches included in this debian-kernel SVN thing? I don't know svn, so a web link or a tarball would be best for me. I could inspect these patches once or twice, but have no intention of checking them all the time. Best regards, -- Martin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sarge may be last Debian release for 32 bit sparc systems
On Mon, Jul 25, 2005 at 02:06:46PM -0700, Blars Blarson wrote: > Sun4m is the last supported 32-bit sparc architecture. Reportedly, > the 2.6 kernel does not work in multi-processor mode on them, and > dropping support of 2.4 from Etch is being discussed. But it works well with a mono-processor system, so we could continue to support those systems. -- .''`. Aurelien Jarno | GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73 : :' : Debian GNU/Linux developer | Electrical Engineer `. `' [EMAIL PROTECTED] | [EMAIL PROTECTED] `-people.debian.org/~aurel32 | www.aurel32.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sarge may be last Debian release for 32 bit sparc systems
Blars Blarson wrote: > In my opinion, we should drop support of all 32-bit sparc systems from > Etch due to lack of people willing to spend the time to support them. This > doesn't mean that we should delibaratly break things for them, but that > the interest in continuing to support them is below what is needed to keep > them as a viable part of Debian. I have a SS5/110 w/ 96 MiB and a regular TGX that just got Sarge installed on it, and it works beautifully. That's my only sun4m, I mostly own sun4c hardware (and a few sun3 / sun3x / sun4, but I have no hope for Debian there). How much effort is needed to keep the sparc32 port alive, at least on sun4m ? There seems to be a lot of people with working hardware... As many others, I lack time and skills to be really helpful, but I'm willing to do my little bit to preserve the port if I can... -- Romain Dolbeau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sarge may be last Debian release for 32 bit sparc systems
On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 01:48:42 +0100 Neil Pilgrim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > more available too. I'm not sure how much memory they have, but perhaps > the SS10/20 dimms that Eric Jorgensen advertised may work ok in them. I'm pretty sure that the vast majority of these dimms will only work in the SS10 and possibly some oddball like the SparcServer 6xxMP line (but even that i doubt). Some of them are Kingston branded and iirc are 50ns rather than the 60 and 70ns you usually see for an SS10. They may work in an SS20. I could swear I heard that the only difference is the speed. At the moment, I actually don't know which dimms are in what machine. 512M of them are in a live server in coloc, the other several of them (7-800 megs or so) are scattered between spare ss10's that I'm anxious to get rid of. I also have an SS2 with 64 megs of 30 pin simms and a CG6 if anybody really wants to go slumming. afaik it still works. I probably have a CG3 or three too. Also two SM51's that probably work fine. The rest of the spare mbus modules are sm31's. The point is, if the fast kingston dimms turn out to be in the live machine, I'm not going to pull them for you. But if i migrate to a U5 in a few months, they'll become available. I may have found a home for the pile of 'em, but I'd rather get SS10's out my door with ram installed if i can. If you want one, you have to pick it up in Utah, and in fact dangerously close to the SCO building. If anyone else is in the spirit of giving, the chemistry department at the U of Texas at San Antonio needs SS5's (and ram, and drives, but just sparcstation 5) as spares to drive NMR spectrometers. I can put you in touch with the lab manager who needs them. Unfortunately they'll be running Solaris, because the spectrometer vendor doesn't sell or support a control application for any other OS. Sometimes obsolete hardware and software must live on simply because a machine that cost a quarter of a million dollars can't function without it. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sarge may be last Debian release for 32 bit sparc systems
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: [sparcstation LX] >I'm not sure how much memory they have, but perhaps >the SS10/20 dimms that Eric Jorgensen advertised may work ok in them. Nope, the LX/classic/classic x use 72-pin 60ns fast page parity memory in pairs. 4 meg and 16 meg ones are supported, reportedly 32 meg ones will work in the third pair of slots allowing 128 megs. 96 megs is the most officially supported. My classic and LX both have 96 megs, I may have some original 4meg dimms somewhere. -- Blars Blarson [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.blars.org/blars.html With Microsoft, failure is not an option. It is a standard feature. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sarge may be last Debian release for 32 bit sparc systems
Blars Blarson wrote: [...] Sun4m is the last supported 32-bit sparc architecture. Reportedly, the 2.6 kernel does not work in multi-processor mode on them, and dropping support of 2.4 from Etch is being discussed. Note that lack of hardware is not the problem, if anyone wants some sun4m systems (located in Los Angeles) let me know before they wind up in the recycle pile. To add to this for anyone who is interested, I have 5 sparcstation LX machines, some possibly needing the boot-lock removed (possible using a kernel hack some time ago, not sure now), which are currently just gathering dust in my bedroom. So if anyone is in the UK (Aberdeen, Scotland) and would work on updating the sun4m port, I can make one or more available too. I'm not sure how much memory they have, but perhaps the SS10/20 dimms that Eric Jorgensen advertised may work ok in them. OTOH while I'm not a kernel hacker, I could at least do installation/run-testing with these - I even have an external scsi cdrom drive for them, somewhere. -- Neil -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sarge may be last Debian release for 32 bit sparc systems
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> martin@bugs.unl.edu.ar writes: >Please tell me if there is something else in debian with 64bit support. AFAIK >the kernel is the only 64bit binary. Not even gcc is 64 bit. strace, gdb, and a few others. Several libraries. gcc supports compiling 64-bit binaries, and all the toolchain supports creating them. >The question I have now is: If everything, except the kernel is 32 bit, what >is it that's going to be dropped? Without a working kernel, what do you expect? Installing and upgrading such systems is what I expect to break first. The real thing being dropped is the expectation that things have been tested and will work. -- Blars Blarson [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.blars.org/blars.html With Microsoft, failure is not an option. It is a standard feature. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sarge may be last Debian release for 32 bit sparc systems
Generally it means that you can continue to install the latest software on your sun4m, but do not file bug reports, and likely, compile your own kernels. On Mon, Jul 25, 2005 at 11:19:55PM +0200, Hendrik Sattler wrote: > Am Montag, 25. Juli 2005 23:06 schrieb Blars Blarson: > > In my opinion, we should drop support of all 32-bit sparc systems from > > Etch due to lack of people willing to spend the time to support them. > > This doesn't mean that we should delibaratly break things for them, > > but that the interest in continuing to support them is below what is > > needed to keep them as a viable part of Debian. > > Hmm, what's needed to support sparc32? > Debian is one of the last to support sparc32 and I'd be really sorry to see > it > abandon that support. > Any alternatives? > > > Support of sun4c and sun4d was effectivly dropped from Sarge. The > > only reports trying d-i on this hardware that I remember seeing were > > failures, and noone bother to try to fix it. Upgrades from Woody may > > work, but were not well tested either. > > > > Sun4m is the last supported 32-bit sparc architecture. Reportedly, > > the 2.6 kernel does not work in multi-processor mode on them, and > > dropping support of 2.4 from Etch is being discussed. > > Ok, kernel development is not that easy, especially when it comes to SMP > support. Additionally, I do not understand how such support can break during > development... > > HS > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- Debian - http://www.debian.org/ Linux 1394 - http://www.linux1394.org/ Subversion - http://subversion.tigris.org/ SwissDisk - http://www.swissdisk.com/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Sarge may be last Debian release for 32 bit sparc systems
Hi All, I saw the following: - >Reportedly, current 2.6 kernels do not work *at all* on sun4m. I mailed this list with an update ref: the SPARC 4 sun4m and the 2.6.12-1-sparc32 kernel which Jurij requested people try out. Works fine on my box, after 1 or 2 issues which were solved quite quickly with help from Jurij and Google :-) Its running sarge and I am just doing an update/upgrade on the system, everything seems to be going ok though. Just thought I would drop a mail. Cheers, Steve -Original Message- From: Steve Langasek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 July 2005 03:15 To: debian-boot@lists.debian.org; debian-sparc@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Sarge may be last Debian release for 32 bit sparc systems On Mon, Jul 25, 2005 at 02:06:46PM -0700, Blars Blarson wrote: > In my opinion, we should drop support of all 32-bit sparc systems from > Etch due to lack of people willing to spend the time to support them. > This doesn't mean that we should delibaratly break things for them, > but that the interest in continuing to support them is below what is > needed to keep them as a viable part of Debian. > Support of sun4c and sun4d was effectivly dropped from Sarge. The > only reports trying d-i on this hardware that I remember seeing were > failures, and noone bother to try to fix it. Upgrades from Woody may > work, but were not well tested either. Were there actually install reports on sun4c and sun4d? I don't remember seeing any. Anyway, AIUI BenC killed these off years ago by changes to how gilbc was compiled. > Sun4m is the last supported 32-bit sparc architecture. Reportedly, > the 2.6 kernel does not work in multi-processor mode on them, and > dropping support of 2.4 from Etch is being discussed. Reportedly, current 2.6 kernels do not work *at all* on sun4m. This according to Jurij Smakov, who appears to currently be the sparc kernel maintainer in Debian. > Note that lack of hardware is not the problem, if anyone wants some > sun4m systems (located in Los Angeles) let me know before they wind up > in the recycle pile. I have one here; works fine under sarge with a 2.4 kernel. I have no intention of spending large amounts of my own time to keep 2.6 viable on this architecture, though, when as it stands the box I have is only powered up for use as a porting machine and it can't even be used to build Debian kernels because depmod bombs out. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sarge may be last Debian release for 32 bit sparc systems
On Tue, Jul 26, 2005 at 09:11:45AM +0200, mag wrote: > 2005-07-25, h keltez?ssel 14.06-kor Blars Blarson ezt ?rta: > > In my opinion, we should drop support of all 32-bit sparc systems from > > Etch due to lack of people willing to spend the time to support them. > > I have just decided to give a try to an old SS10 :( > Maybe it is another reason to actually begin it ;) > > Nonetheless I understand the reasons for the proposal, and cannot offer > more support than trying to answer questions related to areas where I > will be able to overcome problems. > > Is it true that only kernel and closely related packages should mean > special problems for sparc32? If there's no kernel, the userspace doesn't matter. While it's hard to imagine, these machines were newish around the time of the 2-digit MHz clock speed Pentiums, before MMX even. Well, we still support Pentium machines, so why not sun4m machines? The sad answer is both that PC hardware is more prevelent by far, and that it hasn't changed that much since then. When I say it hasn't changed that much, what I mean is that it has massive backward compatibility by comparison. That's actually bad, which is why it's sad. sun4m hardware is vastly different from US2 hardware, and not just in the 32 v. 64 way. And even inside that class of machines, there are a lot of incompatible variations. The truth of the situation is that the massive technological beating the x86 industry has delivered on modern SPARC processors has dealt that architecture a mortal blow, but it's still thrashing. But it has killed the pre-ultraSPARC hardware cold dead at this point. All that is keeping it supported up to now is sentimental fools. I count myself in there somewhere. The dang hardware is so slow I run my SS20 with NFS root, because it's way faster than the speed of a local disk! I load the kernel off the disk and then I have a little rc script that spins the disk down so I don't have to listen to that banshee. I mean, hey. > I would be interested in an estimate of the sparc32 userbase size. Still one here, but I admit that it gets turned on a lot less than my U2. And I have to admit that I'm considering pulling the plug on it, laquering it and putting it in the museum for good. Do you want to spend weeks fixing the kernel problems for me? Before you start, you should know that it's a dual Ross HyperSPARC machine, much different from a dual SuperSPARC. Sigh. a -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sarge may be last Debian release for 32 bit sparc systems
2005-07-25, h keltezéssel 14.06-kor Blars Blarson ezt írta: > In my opinion, we should drop support of all 32-bit sparc systems from > Etch due to lack of people willing to spend the time to support them. I have just decided to give a try to an old SS10 :( Maybe it is another reason to actually begin it ;) Nonetheless I understand the reasons for the proposal, and cannot offer more support than trying to answer questions related to areas where I will be able to overcome problems. Is it true that only kernel and closely related packages should mean special problems for sparc32? I would be interested in an estimate of the sparc32 userbase size.
Re: Sarge may be last Debian release for 32 bit sparc systems
Hi, On Mon, 25 Jul 2005, Steve Langasek wrote: On Mon, Jul 25, 2005 at 02:06:46PM -0700, Blars Blarson wrote: In my opinion, we should drop support of all 32-bit sparc systems from Etch due to lack of people willing to spend the time to support them. This doesn't mean that we should delibaratly break things for them, but that the interest in continuing to support them is below what is needed to keep them as a viable part of Debian. Support of sun4c and sun4d was effectivly dropped from Sarge. The only reports trying d-i on this hardware that I remember seeing were failures, and noone bother to try to fix it. Upgrades from Woody may work, but were not well tested either. Were there actually install reports on sun4c and sun4d? I don't remember seeing any. Anyway, AIUI BenC killed these off years ago by changes to how gilbc was compiled. I have built an unoptimized glibc and made it available. A couple of people have attempted the woody -> sarge upgrades on sun4c machines using it and instructions at http://wiki.debian.net/?SparcSun4c with results which I would describe as "mostly successful" :-). Sun4m is the last supported 32-bit sparc architecture. Reportedly, the 2.6 kernel does not work in multi-processor mode on them, and dropping support of 2.4 from Etch is being discussed. Reportedly, current 2.6 kernels do not work *at all* on sun4m. This according to Jurij Smakov, who appears to currently be the sparc kernel maintainer in Debian. Yes, indeed I could not make it work with neither 2.6.11 or 2.6.12 kernels. It would not boot with initrd, debugging showed that basic memory copying routines are broken. Removing initrd support (initial plan for 2.6.12) actually made it possible to boot, but it did not eliminate the problems, so I was still occasionally triggering a filesystem corruption in my tests. In the end we decided not to build the sparc32 kernel images for 2.6.12 release, so the first step towards dropping it has already been done. It also appears that the success or failure to boot is correlated with positions of memory chips in the slots, not really an acceptable situation. Note that lack of hardware is not the problem, if anyone wants some sun4m systems (located in Los Angeles) let me know before they wind up in the recycle pile. Blars, if you can keep one machine (fastest/most memory) until at least the end of September, I should be able to pick it up. I have one here; works fine under sarge with a 2.4 kernel. I have no intention of spending large amounts of my own time to keep 2.6 viable on this architecture, though, when as it stands the box I have is only powered up for use as a porting machine and it can't even be used to build Debian kernels because depmod bombs out. I am willing to fiddle with kernel options and available patches, but I'm really not hardcore enough to keep the sparc32 afloat. So unless someone upstream will start actively working on it again, I see dropping support for it as inevitable. Best regards, Jurij Smakov[EMAIL PROTECTED] Key: http://www.wooyd.org/pgpkey/ KeyID: C99E03CC -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sarge may be last Debian release for 32 bit sparc systems
On Mon, Jul 25, 2005 at 02:06:46PM -0700, Blars Blarson wrote: > In my opinion, we should drop support of all 32-bit sparc systems from > Etch due to lack of people willing to spend the time to support them. > This doesn't mean that we should delibaratly break things for them, > but that the interest in continuing to support them is below what is > needed to keep them as a viable part of Debian. > Support of sun4c and sun4d was effectivly dropped from Sarge. The > only reports trying d-i on this hardware that I remember seeing were > failures, and noone bother to try to fix it. Upgrades from Woody may > work, but were not well tested either. Were there actually install reports on sun4c and sun4d? I don't remember seeing any. Anyway, AIUI BenC killed these off years ago by changes to how gilbc was compiled. > Sun4m is the last supported 32-bit sparc architecture. Reportedly, > the 2.6 kernel does not work in multi-processor mode on them, and > dropping support of 2.4 from Etch is being discussed. Reportedly, current 2.6 kernels do not work *at all* on sun4m. This according to Jurij Smakov, who appears to currently be the sparc kernel maintainer in Debian. > Note that lack of hardware is not the problem, if anyone wants some > sun4m systems (located in Los Angeles) let me know before they wind up > in the recycle pile. I have one here; works fine under sarge with a 2.4 kernel. I have no intention of spending large amounts of my own time to keep 2.6 viable on this architecture, though, when as it stands the box I have is only powered up for use as a porting machine and it can't even be used to build Debian kernels because depmod bombs out. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Sarge may be last Debian release for 32 bit sparc systems
Am Dienstag, 26. Juli 2005 00:34 schrieb Martín Marqués: > El Lun 25 Jul 2005 18:19, Hendrik Sattler escribió: > > > Support of sun4c and sun4d was effectivly dropped from Sarge. The > > > only reports trying d-i on this hardware that I remember seeing were > > > failures, and noone bother to try to fix it. Upgrades from Woody may > > > work, but were not well tested either. > > > > > > Sun4m is the last supported 32-bit sparc architecture. Reportedly, > > > the 2.6 kernel does not work in multi-processor mode on them, and > > > dropping support of 2.4 from Etch is being discussed. > > > > Ok, kernel development is not that easy, especially when it comes to SMP > > support. Additionally, I do not understand how such support can break > > during development... > > Please tell me if there is something else in debian with 64bit support. > AFAIK the kernel is the only 64bit binary. Not even gcc is 64 bit. > > The question I have now is: If everything, except the kernel is 32 bit, > what is it that's going to be dropped? Sparc32-SMP (like an SS20 with two MBUS-Modules) can only use one CPU with linux-2.6, dropping linux-2.4 (e.g. from installer) will make it a hard time installing Debian on it (well, still possible, though). Other could again argue on compiling with v9 instead of v8 (like currently done). This would definitely kill sun4m. HS
Re: Sarge may be last Debian release for 32 bit sparc systems
El Lun 25 Jul 2005 18:19, Hendrik Sattler escribió: > > > Support of sun4c and sun4d was effectivly dropped from Sarge. The > > only reports trying d-i on this hardware that I remember seeing were > > failures, and noone bother to try to fix it. Upgrades from Woody may > > work, but were not well tested either. > > > > Sun4m is the last supported 32-bit sparc architecture. Reportedly, > > the 2.6 kernel does not work in multi-processor mode on them, and > > dropping support of 2.4 from Etch is being discussed. > > Ok, kernel development is not that easy, especially when it comes to SMP > support. Additionally, I do not understand how such support can break during > development... Please tell me if there is something else in debian with 64bit support. AFAIK the kernel is the only 64bit binary. Not even gcc is 64 bit. The question I have now is: If everything, except the kernel is 32 bit, what is it that's going to be dropped? -- select 'mmarques' || '@' || 'unl.edu.ar' AS email; - Martín Marqués | Programador, DBA Centro de Telemática| Administrador Universidad Nacional del Litoral -
Re: Sarge may be last Debian release for 32 bit sparc systems
On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 14:06:46 -0700 Blars Blarson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Support of sun4c and sun4d was effectivly dropped from Sarge. The > only reports trying d-i on this hardware that I remember seeing were > failures, and noone bother to try to fix it. Upgrades from Woody may > work, but were not well tested either. Not if the binaries are compiled for sparc v8, as has been indicated elsewhere. I loathe my old sun4c gear and will be shortly converting my last IPC - which hasn't been turned on in 7 years - into a functional lunchbox. Anybody who really wants to play with sun4c can come by my place for a free SS2 w/ full complement of ram. > Note that lack of hardware is not the problem, if anyone wants some > sun4m systems (located in Los Angeles) let me know before they wind up > in the recycle pile. > > (If you don't have the skills/time for doing supporting the hardware > yourself, you could substitue money. However, it would be much > cheaper just to replace your outdated hardware.) I have a hard time disagreeing. I had an SS10 die and replaced it with a spare, and found myself believing that i would have been much better off finding a big wad of dimms for an idle ultra5 rather than putting another ss10 in (free) coloc. If anybody needs a great big pile of ss10 dimms, drop me an email. I think some of them may be fast enough to run in an ss20 but i have no real idea. I have at least 768 megs of them. Also willing to give you my pile of SS10's and two SM51 modules if you pick them up and never speak to me of them again. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sarge may be last Debian release for 32 bit sparc systems
Am Montag, 25. Juli 2005 23:06 schrieb Blars Blarson: > In my opinion, we should drop support of all 32-bit sparc systems from > Etch due to lack of people willing to spend the time to support them. > This doesn't mean that we should delibaratly break things for them, > but that the interest in continuing to support them is below what is > needed to keep them as a viable part of Debian. Hmm, what's needed to support sparc32? Debian is one of the last to support sparc32 and I'd be really sorry to see it abandon that support. Any alternatives? > Support of sun4c and sun4d was effectivly dropped from Sarge. The > only reports trying d-i on this hardware that I remember seeing were > failures, and noone bother to try to fix it. Upgrades from Woody may > work, but were not well tested either. > > Sun4m is the last supported 32-bit sparc architecture. Reportedly, > the 2.6 kernel does not work in multi-processor mode on them, and > dropping support of 2.4 from Etch is being discussed. Ok, kernel development is not that easy, especially when it comes to SMP support. Additionally, I do not understand how such support can break during development... HS -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
