On Sunday 08 April 2007 7:19 pm, Paul Brook wrote: > > Mr Paul Brook did break the PREP and heathrow machines while doing > > changes in the PCI code. There were some posts on this list reporting > > this and he never even tried to fix what he broke. And now he's > > complaining "I cannot test as it does not work". Looks like a bad joke, > > no ? > > AFAIK PPC emulation hasn't *ever* worked well enough to boot without at least > building a custom linux kernel. In addition the -kernel commandline option > have no effect, and there is no test image available.
By the way, if this ever _does_ start to work, I'd appreciate hearing about it. Right now, my build scripts are building a PowerPC kernel and ext2 filesystem image, using a procedure that works on arm, mips, x86, and x86-64. It's producing a _result_, but I have no idea if it actually works. I do know that I can't run it under qemu the way I can all the others. (Even sparc at least _boots_, I think its problem is a uClibc issue.) http://landley.net/code/firmware/downloads/image Shell scripts to build all that from source (plus cross compilers and a tarball of the files in the ext2 image) are one level up. > I stand by my original statement. > A machine that requires building a custom kernel, maybe hacking a > bootloader, and creating a bootable filesystem from scratch is untestable. Well, it's certainly inconvenient. The custom kernel I can do, the filesystem I've got. But bootloaders are a bit of a weak spot with me... Rob -- Penguicon 5.0 Apr 20-22, Linux Expo/SF Convention. Bruce Schneier, Christine Peterson, Steve Jackson, Randy Milholland, Elizabeth Bear, Charlie Stross...
