Re: Arch qualification for buster: call for DSA, Security, toolchain concerns

2020-08-04 Thread Florian Weimer
* Florian Weimer: >> * Concern for mips, mips64el, mipsel and ppc64el: no upstream support >>in GCC >>(Raised by the GCC maintainer; carried over from stretch) > > I'm surprised to read this. ppc64el features prominently in the > toolchain work I do (thou

Re: Arch qualification for buster: call for DSA, Security, toolchain concerns

2018-06-29 Thread Florian Weimer
* Riku Voipio: > On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 08:11:14PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: >> * Niels Thykier: >> >> > armel/armhf: >> > >> > >> > * Undesirable to keep the hardware running beyond 2020. armhf VM >> >s

Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification

2016-06-19 Thread Florian Weimer
* Lennart Sorensen: > There are a lot of 32bit powerpc chips still going into embedded systems > being built today. They are not going away anytime soon. Do they implement the ISA required by the existing Debian port?

Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification

2016-06-19 Thread Florian Weimer
> In other words, i don't think a s390x box will ever just die. I'm sure “death” encompasses all events which might lead Debian to lose access to relevant hardware. It's not just about faults with a piece of equipment.

Re: DSO linking changes for wheezy

2010-11-16 Thread Florian Weimer
* Roland McGrath: I can't see why you think --as-needed is fundamentally wrong or unnecessary. It is fundamentally wrong because -lfoo means I demand that the initializers of libfoo.so run, whether or not I called anything in it. So it's more like static linking. 8-) IMHO, the current

Re: Dropping the amd64-generic flavour

2006-06-26 Thread Florian Weimer
* Francesco Pietra: What about k8-smp? Do we still need non-SMP kernels in the age of hyperthreading, multi-core CPUs, and preemption? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Dropping the amd64-generic flavour

2006-06-24 Thread Florian Weimer
* Frederik Schueler: -generic is odd and too long. I am considering to change the naming scheme completely, and call the flavours 2.6.x-y-amd64 and 2.6.x-y-em64t respectively. Newer GCCs produce AMD64 code which is supposed to be closed to optimal to what GCC can produce on EM64T. Does it

Re: Dropping the amd64-generic flavour

2006-06-14 Thread Florian Weimer
* Goswin von Brederlow: I would suggest keeping the name amd64-generic. It is easier for users to see that -generic fits all than -k8. It's also easier to reintroduce split packages if necessary. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact