On 12/06/2012 10:05 PM, Laurent Vivier wrote:
Note3: and for those that want to know the real power of their new m68k
machine, I've added in attachement bogomips.c to compute the bogomips
and the equivalent 040 cpu frequency. Mine (on a Q6600 a 2.4 Ghz) is:
$ ./bogomips
Clocking: 132
BogoMi
On Thu, 6 Dec 2012, Laurent Vivier wrote:
> I think it should be a good idea to play with the linux-user mode of
> qemu. Used with the linux containers, you can run real m68k users binary
> on an x86 kernel (it means gigabytes of memory, several CPU cores,
> Terabytes of SATA disks, gigabits e
Hi Thorsten,
Le jeudi 06 décembre 2012 à 20:56 +, Thorsten Glaser a écrit :
> Laurent Vivier dixit:
>
> >I think it should be a good idea to play with the linux-user mode of
> >qemu.
>
> Does that emulate an MMU? The system mode doesn’t, IIRC.
MMU is useless in usermode emulation.
> >qemu
Laurent Vivier dixit:
>I think it should be a good idea to play with the linux-user mode of
>qemu.
Does that emulate an MMU? The system mode doesn’t, IIRC.
>qemu linux-user mode traps guest (m68k) syscalls to translate them to
>native ones. It's not perfect.
Well right. It also doesn’t catch ge
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 1/31/2011 2:55 AM, Laurent Vivier wrote:
> Hi,
>
> thank you for this complete answer.
>
> I found the ISO here:
>
> http://people.debian.org/~smarenka/d-i/m68k/cds/daily/debian-etch-m68k-m68k-netinst.iso
>
> and did a bootable one here:
>
> ht
Hi,
thank you for this complete answer.
I found the ISO here:
http://people.debian.org/~smarenka/d-i/m68k/cds/daily/debian-etch-m68k-m68k-netinst.iso
and did a bootable one here:
http://vivierlaurent.free.fr/Debian_etch-m68k_netinst.iso
It seems as I add a file inside, the "check CDROM" menu
Laurent Vivier dixit:
>Where can I find an up-to-date kernel .deb for macintosh architecture ?
Right now, all up-to-date “official” inofficial kernel .debs are
here: http://ftp.debian-ports.org/debian/pool-m68k/main/l/linux-2.6/
I have only tested atari, though, and am in the process of building
On Mon, 30 Nov 2009, Stephen R. Marenka wrote:
>
> On Sun, November 29, 2009 6:59 pm, fth...@telegraphics.com.au wrote:
>
> > That's why I'm interested in etch-m68k (glibc-2.3.6) buildds. I don't
> > see any role for glibc-2.5 in the process of updating to a tool chain
> > based on eglibc-2.
On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 08:32:20 -0600 (CST), "Stephen R. Marenka"
wrote:
> The other problem with etch-m68k is that we can't make changes to that
> distribution any more. It sounds like we should bootstrap sid's
toolchain
> (and friends) starting with etch-m68k.
Erm, well, that was basically my int
On Sun, November 29, 2009 6:59 pm, fth...@telegraphics.com.au wrote:
> That's why I'm interested in etch-m68k (glibc-2.3.6) buildds. I don't see
> any role for glibc-2.5 in the process of updating to a tool chain based on
> eglibc-2.10, binutils-2.19.51, gcc-4.4.1, linux-2.6.31. So I don't see an
On Sun, 29 Nov 2009, Stephen R. Marenka wrote:
>
> On Sat, November 28, 2009 7:12 pm, fth...@telegraphics.com.au wrote:
>
> > There are some packages that I'd like to see built under etch-m68k.
> > From the gcc-4.2 build failures that Stephen showed us, I have my
> > doubts about packages in
On Sat, November 28, 2009 7:12 pm, fth...@telegraphics.com.au wrote:
> There are some packages that I'd like to see built under etch-m68k. From
> the gcc-4.2 build failures that Stephen showed us, I have my doubts about
> packages in the testing/unstable suites.
>
> I'd like to see some etch-m68k
On Fri, 27 Nov 2009, Ingo J?rgensmann wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 10:10:49AM -0600, Stephen R. Marenka wrote:
> > On Fri, November 27, 2009 3:12 am, Ingo J??rgensmann wrote:
> > > On a sidenote it seems that Arrakis and Spice aren't building
> > > packages anymore. Are they still needed?
>
On Fri, November 27, 2009 10:46 am, Ingo Jürgensmann wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 10:10:49AM -0600, Stephen R. Marenka wrote:
>> On Fri, November 27, 2009 3:12 am, Ingo Jürgensmann wrote:
>> > On a sidenote it seems that Arrakis and Spice aren't building packages
>> > anymore. Are they still
On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 10:10:49AM -0600, Stephen R. Marenka wrote:
> On Fri, November 27, 2009 3:12 am, Ingo Jürgensmann wrote:
> > On a sidenote it seems that Arrakis and Spice aren't building packages
> > anymore. Are they still needed?
> Sid is broken last I checked. I haven't really seen a gr
On Fri, November 27, 2009 3:12 am, Ingo Jürgensmann wrote:
> Heya!
>
> I'm still operating 3 m68k buildds and would like to update them.
> Currently sources.list points to etch-m68k which is, uhm, fairly old and
> outdated, I believe.
> Is there anything newer? Would it make sense to switch to
> f
On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 06:00:17PM +0200, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> Hey,
>
> as I was unable to find any etch-m68k uploads done after June 2008, I
> just disabled that suite on ftp.debian.org. The suite will stay around
> on ftp-master and the mirrors as long as regular etch does, and will be
> archi
Le 16 juin 08 à 07:39, Eugen Paiuc a écrit :
Hi Laurent,
Hi Eugen,
http://people.debian.org/~smarenka/m68k/openssl_0.9.8c-4etch3_m68k.deb
Thank you for the link.
In fact the one I needed is:
http://people.debian.org/~smarenka/m68k/libssl0.9.8_0.9.8c-4etch3_m68k.deb
Regards,
Laurent
-
On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 07:39:52AM +0200, Eugen Paiuc wrote:
> Hi Laurent,
>
> http://people.debian.org/~smarenka/m68k/openssl_0.9.8c-4etch3_m68k.deb
>
> regards,
>
> Eugen
>
> --
>
> I'm playing with aranym and I have "debootstraped" an etch-m68k root fs.
>
> When I try to install open
On Fri, Jul 06, 2007 at 08:11:45AM +0200, Michael Schmitz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > My effort to to build etch-m68k are stalled because the packages I have
> > uploaded are stuck in the new queue and I did not receive instructions
> > how to upload the four rejected packages.
>
> The reason for rejectio
Hi,
> My effort to to build etch-m68k are stalled because the packages I have
> uploaded are stuck in the new queue and I did not receive instructions
> how to upload the four rejected packages.
The reason for rejection was that the same package versions do already
exist? Maybe a binNMU could cha
> > > Same as the oldstable buildds. Christian can bring garkin back soon I
> > > hope.
> >
> > The oldstable buildds have a wanna-buildd database on buildd.debian.org,
> > etch-m68k and etch-m68k-security don't. buildd can handle that, it can't
> > handle multiple wanna-buildd databases on differe
On Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 07:28:18AM -0500, Stephen R Marenka wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 09:15:12AM +0200, Michael Schmitz wrote:
> > > > Eh, I thought the security people wanted to do m68k builds, but I'm not
> > > > sure. Joey?
> > >
> > > buildd.debian.org doesn't have wanna-build db's for e
On Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 09:15:12AM +0200, Michael Schmitz wrote:
> > > Eh, I thought the security people wanted to do m68k builds, but I'm not
> > > sure. Joey?
> >
> > buildd.debian.org doesn't have wanna-build db's for either etch-m68k or
> > etch-m68k-security. If we setup our own, we have to de
> > Eh, I thought the security people wanted to do m68k builds, but I'm not
> > sure. Joey?
>
> buildd.debian.org doesn't have wanna-build db's for either etch-m68k or
> etch-m68k-security. If we setup our own, we have to dedicate buildds that
> are currently running unstable. I don't think we curr
On Mon, Jun 25, 2007 at 06:08:06PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 23, 2007 at 10:40:11PM +, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > On Sun, Jun 24, 2007 at 12:08:32AM +0200, Luk Claes wrote:
> > > If you mean for etch, I guess you should upload them to etch-m68k.
> >
> > I will not do that: I d
On Mon, Jun 25, 2007 at 06:08:59PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 23, 2007 at 08:50:41PM -0500, Stephen R Marenka wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 23, 2007 at 11:30:34PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > > Hello m68k porters,
> > >
> > > I have build all etch security updates that do not build-d
On Sat, Jun 23, 2007 at 10:40:11PM +, Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 24, 2007 at 12:08:32AM +0200, Luk Claes wrote:
> > If you mean for etch, I guess you should upload them to etch-m68k.
>
> I will not do that: I do binary-only upload so etch-m68k Sources file
> would not match the Packag
On Sat, Jun 23, 2007 at 08:50:41PM -0500, Stephen R Marenka wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 23, 2007 at 11:30:34PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > Hello m68k porters,
> >
> > I have build all etch security updates that do not build-depend on mysql:
[...]
> > Any suggestion concerning what I should do with t
On Sat, Jun 23, 2007 at 08:50:41PM -0500, Stephen R Marenka wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 23, 2007 at 11:30:34PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> >
> > Any suggestion concerning what I should do with them ?
>
> Upload them to etch-m68k. That or we need to get the security people to
> create us a distributio
On Sat, Jun 23, 2007 at 11:30:34PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> Hello m68k porters,
>
> I have build all etch security updates that do not build-depend on mysql:
>
> aircrack-ng_0.6.2-7etch1
> clamav_0.90.1-3etch2
> ekg_1.7~rc2-1etch1
> file_4.17-5etch1
> freetype_2.2.1-5+etch1
> gimp_2.2.13-1e
On Sun, Jun 24, 2007 at 12:08:32AM +0200, Luk Claes wrote:
> Bill Allombert wrote:
> > Hello m68k porters,
> >
> > I have build all etch security updates that do not build-depend on mysql:
> >
> > aircrack-ng_0.6.2-7etch1
> > clamav_0.90.1-3etch2
> > ekg_1.7~rc2-1etch1
> > file_4.17-5etch1
> > fr
Bill Allombert wrote:
> Hello m68k porters,
>
> I have build all etch security updates that do not build-depend on mysql:
>
> aircrack-ng_0.6.2-7etch1
> clamav_0.90.1-3etch2
> ekg_1.7~rc2-1etch1
> file_4.17-5etch1
> freetype_2.2.1-5+etch1
> gimp_2.2.13-1etch1
> ipsec-tools_0.6.6-3.1etch1
> libapa
On Mon, 9 Apr 2007 20:45:18 +0200
Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 09, 2007 at 07:14:31AM -0500, Stephen R Marenka wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 09, 2007 at 12:22:40PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > > After that, it's probably best to get some machines up and running to
> > > b
On Tue, Apr 10, 2007 at 06:55:19PM +0200, Ingo Juergensmann wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2007 at 09:54:24AM -0500, Stephen R Marenka wrote:
>
> > Replacing stable with etch-m68k seems to work fine as far as the regular
> > archive is concerned. I'm upgrading both zeus and poseidon to etch,
> > althoug
On Tue, Apr 10, 2007 at 09:54:24AM -0500, Stephen R Marenka wrote:
> Replacing stable with etch-m68k seems to work fine as far as the regular
> archive is concerned. I'm upgrading both zeus and poseidon to etch,
> although I hate to lose security support.
> I'm not sure what w-b stable and testing
On Tue, Apr 10, 2007 at 02:37:02PM +0200, Michael Schmitz wrote:
> > > Patched to do what differently?
> >
> > * To recognize etch-m68k as an actually existing suite (that's buildd,
> > really, rather than sbuild, but okay)
>
> Does the build database already know about etch-m68k? Does it even n
> > Patched to do what differently?
>
> * To recognize etch-m68k as an actually existing suite (that's buildd,
> really, rather than sbuild, but okay)
Does the build database already know about etch-m68k? Does it even need
to? Can't we just figure out what needs to be done for the new 'stable' ?
On Tue, Apr 10, 2007 at 10:04:13AM +0200, Michael Schmitz wrote:
> > After that, it's probably best to get some machines up and running to
> > build for etch/m68k. Most of the packages that aren't built there yet
> > aren't because we were backlogged at the time, I guess, and those should
> > proba
> So now that etch is finalized, I guess it's time to start working on our
> m68k bits -- not having a moving target to work towards is always
> helpful.
>
> If I understand things right, we can upload packages to etch-m68k by way
> of using "etch-m68k" in place of "unstable" (or whatever) in the
>
On Mon, Apr 09, 2007 at 07:14:31AM -0500, Stephen R Marenka wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 09, 2007 at 12:22:40PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > After that, it's probably best to get some machines up and running to
> > build for etch/m68k. Most of the packages that aren't built there yet
> > aren't becaus
On Mon, Apr 09, 2007 at 12:22:40PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> After that, it's probably best to get some machines up and running to
> build for etch/m68k. Most of the packages that aren't built there yet
> aren't because we were backlogged at the time, I guess, and those should
> probably bui
On Mon, Apr 09, 2007 at 12:22:40PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> Anything else someone can come up with?
How about mirror space? I can donate some GBs on my server...
--
Ciao...//Fon: 0381-2744150
Ingo \X/ SIP: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
gpg pubkey: h
43 matches
Mail list logo
