On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 8:21 PM, Ben Hutchings <b...@decadent.org.uk> wrote: > On Mon, 2016-05-23 at 20:16 +0800, YunQiang Su wrote: >> On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 8:11 PM, Ben Hutchings <b...@decadent.org.uk> wrote: >> > >> > On Mon, 2016-05-23 at 19:32 +0800, YunQiang Su wrote: >> > > >> > > On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 7:24 PM, Ben Hutchings wrote: >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > Control: tag -1 - moreinfo >> > > > >> > > > On Mon, 2016-05-23 at 11:14 +0800, YunQiang Su wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 2:30 AM, Ben Hutchings wrote: >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Control: tag -1 moreinfo >> > > > > > >> > > > > > On Sun, 2016-05-22 at 22:52 +0800, YunQiang Su wrote: >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Package: src:linux >> > > > > > > Version: 4.5 - 4.6 >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Hi, this patch add mipsn32 and mipsn32el support and also add >> > > > > > > 6 MIPS r6 architectures. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > mipsn32 and mipsn32el have same flavors with mips64 and mips64el. >> > > > > > Since we have multiarch it is not necessary to duplicate kernel >> > > > > > packages with identical configurations in multiple Debian >> > > > > > architectures. All the N32 architectures should be used in >> > > > > > multiarch >> > > > > > configurations together with the corresponding 64-bit >> > > > > > architectures. >> > > > > > (The same should be true for O32 architectures, but that won't >> > > > > > happen >> > > > > > until the corresponding 64-bit architectures are in the main >> > > > > > archive.) >> > > > > I won't push N32 architecture to the main Debian archive. >> > > > > I just wish the code in the upstream, so I will not have to maintain >> > > > > another >> > > > > git repo, and merge patches again and again. >> > > > > >> > > > > In fact, I may build a standalone N32 private archive in future. >> > > > I will still insist that N32 architectures do not have their own >> > > > kernels, only userland packages (linux-libc-dev, linux-kbuild, linux- >> > > > perf, etc.) >> > > Yes, so mipsn32/mipsn32el architectures has the same flavors with >> > > mips64/mips64el. >> > > >> > > N32 here is about 2 new architectures named mipsn32/mipsn32el. >> > > To make these architectures installable, they must have their own >> > > kernel packages, like >> > > linux-image-4.6.0-1-loongson-3_$(THE_VERSION).mipsn32el.deb. >> > > >> > > This package has the same content with: >> > > >> > > linux-image-4.6.0-1-loongson-3_$(THE_VERSION).mips64el.deb. >> > [...] >> > >> > No. They must be used in a multiarch configuration, same as x32. >> in debian/config/x32/defines, there is a line: >> # empty; x32 must be part of a multiarch installation with an amd64 kernel >> >> I know that n32 is quite same as x32, while I cannot understand why >> both of them have to be 'in a multiarch configuration', >> and cannot be a standalone architecture? > > Because they really are in a multiarch configuration. They rely on a > 64-bit kernel. Labelling it as belonging to the same architecture as > 32-bit userland is a hack, which we no longer need to use.
If you think standalone n32/x32 port is not useful at all, can you help to modified the 4 N32 port to the same way with x32? > > Ben. > > -- > Ben Hutchings > You can't have everything. Where would you put it? -- YunQiang Su
