+++ [EMAIL PROTECTED] [04-02-23 18:53 +0000]: > On Mon, Feb 23, 2004 at 05:49:57PM +0000, Wookey wrote: > > +++ Peter Naulls [04-02-23 13:07 +0000]: > > > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > It's time to get debian-installer ported to arm; all the major porting > > > > work should already have been done getting it to work on other arches, > > > > so what's left should be fairly straightforward. > > > > > > > > If you can't get this working, arm's status as a supported arch will > > > > have to be reviewed: there's no point releasing a distribution that > > > > can't be installed. (It'd be possible to release arm with a different > > > > installation toolset than d-i, but I can't imagine that'd be any easier > > > > or much more useful than getting d-i ported) > > > > You're right of course, and as you observe it really is getting to 'make it > > work or have arse kicked' time. Part of the problem is of course that arm > > installation has always been somewhat 'distributed' - there is a special > > version of bootfloppies for most 'supported' machines because the default > > one doesn't actaully work, and an awful lot of people using debian-derived > > stuff don't use either b-f or d-i to get things installed - they use some > > random bootloader for the board in question. > > > > So in fact debian-arm remains useful to a lot of people even without a > > working debian-installer. > > > > That's not really an adequate excuse for not making it work on at least the > > suitable machines, and hopefully it will be better suited to weird hardware > > than b-f was. We'll see.
I've now got uptodate on d-i again at alioth and will take a look at what needs doing for lart/balloon. > > Poor old vince has found he can't do the kernel _and_ D-I - there aren't > > enough hours in the day. > > While true to some extent I did get D-I to the point where I had > working tftp images for winder, bast, riscstation. I tried to talk to > #debian-boot about autobuilders and kernel-image builders and (as > usual) got blown off, this was several months ago and my tree is now > very very out of date so needs to be done again... > > One point, I was going to use the kernel udeb image thingy but in its > current form adding all the ARM sub arches would make it generate an > additional 40odd packages from the one source...this seemed grossly > excessive and I wanted to find a more elegant solution. > > One issue which was being cleared up but hadn't been resolved was that > the final image stuff wanted to put a single vmlinuz file down for all > sub arches...with several subarches to choose from we ended up without > a sensible kernel for the bootloader to start except for one target :-/ OK - we need to have this discussion on debian-boot I think, in order to work out how best to proceed, so I've added it. D-B people - Is the above still true? ARM currently has (approximately) one kernel per machine. Even just supporting the existing supported stuff and things that have enough resources for installing Debian to be a vaguely sensible thing to do (which excludes quite a lot of potential machines), means at least 10 kernel udebs, and some lesser number of initrds and module sets. Likely targets that someone cares about enough to support are: Iyonix, RiscPC, Riscstation, Netwinder, Balloon, CATS, LART. Advice on best way to proceed is welcome. For much arm hardware using debootstrap rather than D-I may actually make more sense/be easier. We (arm people) need to look at that too. Wookey -- Aleph One Ltd, Bottisham, CAMBRIDGE, CB5 9BA, UK Tel +44 (0) 1223 811679 work: http://www.aleph1.co.uk/ play: http://www.chaos.org.uk/~wookey/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
