On 22 Jun 2021, at 12:45, Dmitry Chagin <dcha...@freebsd.org> wrote: > On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 12:36:26PM +0100, Jessica Clarke wrote: >> On 22 Jun 2021, at 12:01, Dmitry Chagin <dcha...@freebsd.org> wrote: >>> On Mon, Jun 21, 2021 at 10:56:38PM +0100, Jessica Clarke wrote: >>>> On 21 Jun 2021, at 17:56, Dmitry Chagin <dcha...@freebsd.org> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> The branch main has been updated by dchagin: >>>>> >>>>> URL: >>>>> https://cgit.FreeBSD.org/src/commit/?id=e013e36939ac87b53195370fb5e29f29c1a4b5c6 >>>>> >>>>> commit e013e36939ac87b53195370fb5e29f29c1a4b5c6 >>>>> Author: Dmitry Chagin <dcha...@freebsd.org> >>>>> AuthorDate: 2021-06-22 05:32:39 +0000 >>>>> Commit: Dmitry Chagin <dcha...@freebsd.org> >>>>> CommitDate: 2021-06-22 05:32:39 +0000 >>>>> >>>>> linux(4): Get rid of Linuxulator kernel build options. >>>>> >>>>> Stop confusing people, retire COMPAT_LINUX and COMPAT_LINUX32 kernel >>>>> build options. Since we have 32 and 64 bit Linux emulators, we can't >>>>> build both >>>>> emulators together into the kernel. I don't think it matters, Linux >>>>> emulation >>>>> depends on loadable modules (via rc). >>>>> >>>>> Cut LINPROCFS and LINSYSFS for consistency. >>>> >>>> I don’t see why these two should be deleted? They currently build fine, >>>> and GNU/kFreeBSD kernels enable them. They might work as modules, but I >>>> would worry that too many parts of userland would try and read them >>>> before /etc/init.d/kldutils (the init script that loads modules) loads >>>> them, so then we’d have to mess around with GRUB configs to preload >>>> them. If the options work, please leave them in. >>>> >>> >>> both FS modules depend on linux.ko on i386 or linux_common.ko on amd64, >>> so it doesn't make sense to have options for them >> >> But that still worked, and was even in NOTES so being tested by LINT. >> >>>> There’s a separate debate of whether this is the “right” fix for >>>> COMPAT_LINUX*; arguably that *should* work and it’s a bug that they >>>> don’t, not a feature, even if it’s not of much interest to support… >>>> >>>> I’d like to see the second half reverted, please, and believe the first >>>> should be too, but I feel less strongly about that. >>>> >>> >>> I think that descendants should adapt to upstream, esp since there is no >>> KBI or ABI breakage. btw, debian wiki says gnu/kFreeBSD unmaintained >>> since 2014. That is the reason to worry about dead project? >> >> As the current maintainer this is news to me. I see no such comment on >> the port’s wiki page[1]. >> >> Jess >> >> [1] https://wiki.debian.org/Debian_GNU/kFreeBSD >> > I read: https://www.debian.org/ports/kfreebsd-gnu/index.en.html
That doesn’t say unmaintained, that says not officially supported. It’s the equivalent of Tier 1 vs not Tier 1 in FreeBSD, and falls into the same category as powerpc, ppc64 and riscv64, among other architectures. It just means that there are no stable releases, only unstable (-CURRENT equivalent). Jess _______________________________________________ dev-commits-src-main@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/dev-commits-src-main To unsubscribe, send any mail to "dev-commits-src-main-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
