[CC to debian-bsd as it's relevant there, too] On Sun, Jul 29, 2007 at 03:13:03PM +0200, Maciej Jan Broniarz wrote: > Dnia 2007-07-29, o godz. 15:11:55 > Ulrich Teichert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> napisał(a): > > > I tend to differ. It will be easier to fix the Linux kernel, find a > > maintainer for it and then get it into Debian again. We would > > leveraging the existing work better that way. > > > We will agree on one issue. The main problem is the lack of people > working on that port. No matter is it NetBSD or Linux.
The Debian GNU/(k)NetBSD port may have a lack of people and support at the moment (I don't know the current status, though). However, it seems that the upstream development of the sparc32 code in the NetBSD kernel is _not_ halted (unlike the upstream Linux support). Can somebody confirm that? Maybe I'll just ask on the resp. NetBSD list.. In that case, a good long-term solution (IMO) would be to bring the Debian GNU/(k)NetBSD (sparc32) port up to speed (or rather: start it, I don't think it exists yet, there was only work for i386 and alpha, IIRC). That may sound like a lot of work (and it probably is), but I think it's mostly Debian-related work, and not kernel maintainence work (as that is done by upstream), so it may be a good option to keep Debian alive on sparc32 hardware. Comments? Uwe. -- http://www.hermann-uwe.de | http://www.holsham-traders.de http://www.crazy-hacks.org | http://www.unmaintained-free-software.org
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
