On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 09:27:42AM +0200, Riku Voipio wrote: >On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 06:09:11AM +0000, Steve McIntyre wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 11:22:23PM +0000, peter green wrote: >> >>Each flavor of armel and armhf should have the same function, too. >> >IMO if you think you can support all armada series devices that are >> >likely to run debian armhf from one kernel flavour then you should >> >just call the flavour "armada" (similar to the way the flavour that >> >covers beagle/panda/etc is just called "omap") > >> Definitely, yes. Hopefully in the longer term we'll be able to run >> more of the ARMv7+ machines with single kernels using DT, but that's >> not going to happen overnight. > >I hope we could be more ambitious and enter the single zImage / >multiplatform setup early. We could start by simply calling the >armada370 / armadaxp flavour "multiplatform". And then any new >architectures would only be added by including them to multiplatform >flavour - and only accepted if adding doesn't break existing platforms >supported by our multiplatform kernel.
Good point, yes. Anybody object to that? -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK. st...@einval.com Is there anybody out there? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-arm-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130307075008.gg8...@einval.com
