Write to the mailing list, not just me.
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 04:09:05PM +0300, Martin-Éric Racine wrote:
> Hi Ben,
>
> The kernel once again faild to build for armel in unstable, for the same
> reasons as before (the kernel image exceeds a specific size, which makes
> the build abort).
Already fixed in svn. I just didn't think to check whether orion5x
was also close to its limit when trimming iop32x and ixp4xx.
> This seems poised to prevent yet another kernel version
> from trickling down into testing because of a FTBFS on exactly one
> architecture. Given this, I was wondering whether armel will be
> declassified as a release architecture or, alternately, whether the ARM
> porters have been called to help?
I did recently discuss the future of armel with some of the ARM
porters on IRC. It's not going away, but the flavours supporting
really small machines (iop32x and ixp4xx) may be removed. There is
also some work upstream that would allow kirkwood, mv87xx0 and orion5x
to be combined. This would reduce armel to just 2 flavours which
would result in much faster builds. It would also put more size
pressure on orion5x and we might have to drop support for the one
machine with a 1.5 MB partition (most of them have ~2 MB partitions
according to comments where this is defined).
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings
We get into the habit of living before acquiring the habit of thinking.
- Albert Camus
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130612172858.gg4...@decadent.org.uk
