On Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 12:38:56PM -0500, Stephen R Marenka wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 07:27:10PM +0200, Ingo Juergensmann wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 07:03:25PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> >
> > > Now we forward the other way around ;-)
> >
> &
Hi,
We've decided that another list may be too much; instead, we'll be using
debian-68k, but use subject tag policies so that people not interested
in the user support stuff can filter those out.
Therefore, this bug can now be closed.
--
Fun will now commence
-- Seven Of Nine, "Ashes to Ashes
On Thu, Jul 13, 2006 at 03:46:58PM -0500, Stephen R Marenka wrote:
> I rebuilt binutils -O0. This allowed gmp to be rebuilt without playing
> linker games, although I did build gmp -O0.
>
> I think I should go ahead an upload these binutils and gmp.
>
> Any objections?
I'd say go ahead, but file
On Sat, Jul 15, 2006 at 05:42:04PM +0200, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:
> Hi Charles,
> On Sun, Jul 16, 2006 at 12:33:51AM +0900, Charles Plessy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > Dear mentors,
> >
> > I have two packages which fail to build on m68k. The reason for this is
> > obviously a bug in a math
On Mon, Jul 17, 2006 at 06:01:20PM +0200, Thomas Mattes wrote:
> Hi,
>
> on webpage: http://www.debian.org/ports/m68k/ you mention that Debian
> on Motorola is supported for 68020 but one line below you write that a
> MMU is needed to run Debian on Motorola processors.
Both are correct. The 6885
On Tue, Jul 18, 2006 at 09:42:14AM +0200, Florian Ernst wrote:
> Hello there,
>
> | Automatic build of blender_2.42-1 on arrakis by sbuild/m68k 85
> | Build started at 20060718-0142
> | [...]
> | intern/iksolver/intern/IK_QSegment.cpp: In member function 'virtual bool
> IK_QSwingSegment::UpdateAn
Hi,
Looks as if the heat over here has claimed its first casualty; ska had
been flakey a bit over the last few days, and now it refuses to boot,
something with
scsi0 : bus wedge, doing SCSI reset
after which point it has issues with SCSI that eventually end up in a
kernel panic. And that's if I
On Sun, Jul 30, 2006 at 11:36:25AM +0200, Ingo Juergensmann wrote:
> There was just a mail from Petter Reinholdtsen on debian-devel about the
> popularity of archs:
[...]
> If you want to support the m68k port, one of the easiest things you can do,
> is to run "apt-get install popularity-contest" r
On Mon, Jul 31, 2006 at 10:42:07AM +0200, Ingo Juergensmann wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 31, 2006 at 09:35:10AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>
> > > There was just a mail from Petter Reinholdtsen on debian-devel about the
> > > popularity of archs:
> > [...]
> > &g
On Mon, Jul 31, 2006 at 07:42:31AM -0500, Stephen R Marenka wrote:
> Everytime I finally figure out a gcc bug enough to make a decent report,
> another seems to pop up. gcc is what's killing us. gij isn't helping
> much either.
Yeah, I know. You've been putting massive amounts of work, but it see
On Mon, Jul 31, 2006 at 02:20:29PM -0500, Stephen R Marenka wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 31, 2006 at 09:06:18PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 31, 2006 at 07:42:31AM -0500, Stephen R Marenka wrote:
> > > Everytime I finally figure out a gcc bug enough to make a decent repo
Hi all,
I don't know what everyone else thinks about it here, but it would
appear to me that making it in time for Etch is not going to happen
anymore now.
* Too many compiler bugs
* As a result, too many uncompiled packages since *ages*. We haven't
been over the 95% mark of the buildd.debian.or
On Fri, Aug 04, 2006 at 01:43:46AM +1000, Finn Thain wrote:
> Assuming a broken tool chain, yes, the port is defunct.
The main problem is that it currently *is* broken, and that the rumours
go that the toolchain will be frozen *next week*.
This presumably means that fixes can still go in if they
On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 09:24:36PM +0200, Roman Zippel wrote:
> Well, I guess we have to accept that it won't be fixed shortly, but we
> shouldn't give up completely. :)
Well, okay. For clarity, that's not what I'm doing. I think that it's
too late for etch (although I won't stop trying), but I d
On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 04:50:41PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
> If these RAM hogging apps are marked no-build, would that raise the
> build percentage?
No.
We're not backlogged because we can't keep up. We're backlogged because
the compiler isn't working like it should, which results in packages
f
On Fri, Aug 04, 2006 at 08:41:32AM +0200, Ingo Juergensmann wrote:
> Depends on your point of view.
> From my POV I can easily miss those packages on m68k, because I don't use
> them. Other people won't be able to live without those ones. It's a matter
> of what goals do you want to achieve: relea
On Fri, Aug 04, 2006 at 08:57:55AM +0200, Ingo Juergensmann wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 04, 2006 at 01:30:16AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>
> > Well, okay. For clarity, that's not what I'm doing. I think that it's
> > too late for etch (although I won't stop tr
On Fri, Aug 04, 2006 at 06:59:44PM +1000, Finn Thain wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 4 Aug 2006, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 4 Aug 2006, Finn Thain wrote:
> > > On Fri, 4 Aug 2006, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Since most of the problems are caused by compiler issues, what
> > > >
On Fri, Aug 04, 2006 at 12:24:21PM +0200, Roman Zippel wrote:
> While it's possible to avoid these instructions, it would mean possibly
> very larger code and thus even slower code.
Indeed. However, I do not feel that the impact will be unbearably large.
So far, I have found only two cases where
On Fri, Aug 04, 2006 at 08:09:42PM +1000, Finn Thain wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Aug 2006, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 04, 2006 at 06:59:44PM +1000, Finn Thain wrote:
> > > [snip] As I said earlier in the thread I don't see much difference
> > > bet
On Fri, Aug 04, 2006 at 02:37:03PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Aug 2006, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > Indeed. However, I do not feel that the impact will be unbearably large.
> > So far, I have found only two cases where the documentation documents
> > diff
On Fri, Aug 04, 2006 at 05:41:29PM +0200, Roman Zippel wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Aug 2006, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > Other than that, there are a number of opcodes that have been removed
> > (those relating to the BCD data format, for instance, and some others),
> > and most of t
On Sun, Aug 06, 2006 at 07:39:53PM +0200, Richard Zidlicky wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 04, 2006 at 02:37:03PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > On Fri, 4 Aug 2006, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > > * Using address register indirect with predecrement or postincrement mode
> > >
On Wed, Aug 09, 2006 at 11:35:21AM +0200, Roman Zippel wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, 4 Aug 2006, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>
> > > Last time I checked the cas instruction is also not available, which
> > > makes multithreaded code interesting.
> >
> > This
On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 12:28:56PM +1000, Finn Thain wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Aug 2006, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>
> > * More importantly, currently half of our buildd park are macintoshes
> > that will not work with 2.6 kernels. 2.2 and 2.4 are scheduled to be
> > remov
On Mon, Aug 14, 2006 at 06:18:14PM +0200, Michael Schmitz wrote:
> > > Not sure the RTC ever worked, but the serial drivers used to.
> > I've tried a few different approaches to debugging this, like reverting
> > changes made to the mac68k ancestors, comparing it to the CUDA ADB driver,
> > adding
On Mon, Aug 14, 2006 at 05:39:54PM +0200, Roman Zippel wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, 11 Aug 2006, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>
> > > What problems would that be? Toolchain problems don't solve itself and
> > > the build speed doesn't seem to the biggest problem.
&
On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 11:31:01AM +1000, Finn Thain wrote:
> Anyway, I have the logs, what I was after was a kernel core dump, like
> kdump, netdump or lkcd provides on other architectures, so as to do a
> postmortem in gdb.
... which may be pretty hard to do through a serial port. Got it.
--
On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 11:48:53AM +0900, Horms wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am looking at a curious build problem for the heartbeat
> package which I maintain. The problem only seems to manifest on
> m68k, and does not seem to manifiest in the heartbeat-2 package,
> which is largely similar.
Strange.
> h
Hi,
Anyone who's got an m68k sarge system or chroot running in which he
could build debian-installer?
It needs to be done; I'm currently building it on quickstep, but by the
rate we're going, it could take a few days. Quickstep is a 25Mhz (slow)
Mac (also slow), probably a fast amiga or one of th
On Fri, Aug 18, 2006 at 03:54:20PM +0200, Christian T. Steigies wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 18, 2006 at 03:12:45PM +0200, Michael Schmitz wrote:
> > The timeout on q650 should be adjusted properly now. We can requeue it
> > there.
>
> That wont help... w3m is used for building parts of the documentation
On Sun, Aug 20, 2006 at 01:52:48PM +0200, Christian T. Steigies wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 20, 2006 at 12:24:15AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 18, 2006 at 03:54:20PM +0200, Christian T. Steigies wrote:
> > > On Fri, Aug 18, 2006 at 03:12:45PM +0200, Michael Schmitz
On Mon, Aug 21, 2006 at 09:33:10PM +1000, Finn Thain wrote:
> I was hoping for progress on the Q9x0, since I can't test that myself.
Oh, right. Hmm, let's see then. Jazz was just now not doing much at a
system load of 10, so I've just rebooted it. After that, I'll install
that kernel and try it ou
On Mon, Aug 21, 2006 at 10:59:00AM -0700, Brad Boyer wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 21, 2006 at 08:39:57PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > I've also got a IIci sitting right next to me. Would it help if I tried
> > it there?
>
> Well, the ADB is extremely unlikely to work. Thi
On Fri, Sep 01, 2006 at 10:03:00AM +1000, Finn Thain wrote:
> As for the 540, the problem is the 68LC040. There was a thread on this
> problem (and 5xx powerbooks) a year or so ago on this list or the
> linux-m68k list. From that discussion I think we concluded that you must
> either disable swa
On Mon, Sep 04, 2006 at 11:23:46AM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, Brian Morris wrote:
> > it is too bad i think that debian does not have a good system that takes
> > you from source to instaled package in one step, like fink does for macosX.
>
> Oh yes, it does!
>
> apt-g
On Tue, Sep 05, 2006 at 11:42:05AM +0200, Roman Zippel wrote:
> It might also be worth to retry subversion, I checked it, but I didn't see
> that failure, so if that persists, I'll have to recheck.
I'm doing so manually right now, with knowledge of the maintainer (had
discussed it with him on IRC
On Tue, Sep 05, 2006 at 06:39:32PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 05, 2006 at 11:42:05AM +0200, Roman Zippel wrote:
> > It might also be worth to retry subversion, I checked it, but I didn't see
> > that failure, so if that persists, I'll have to recheck.
&
Hi Steve,
On Sun, Sep 17, 2006 at 11:55:02PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
[...]
> So with three months remaining until the scheduled release of etch, the
> release team does not believe it's possible for m68k to close the gap on
> these issues.
>
> As a result, the bts is already ignoring m68k in
On Tue, Sep 19, 2006 at 09:22:29PM -0400, Filipus Klutiero wrote:
> Wouter Verhelst a écrit :
> >Even if you still think that doing this early rather than late is
> >necessary from your point of view, I would still like to search for
> >alternatives, a compromise; say, that
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 01:49:21AM -0400, Filipus Klutiero wrote:
> Wouter Verhelst a écrit :
>
> >On Tue, Sep 19, 2006 at 09:22:29PM -0400, Filipus Klutiero wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Wouter Verhelst a écrit :
> >>
> >>
> >>>Ev
On Wed, Sep 27, 2006 at 11:55:55PM +0200, Christian T. Steigies wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 27, 2006 at 11:58:02AM -0500, Stephen R Marenka wrote:
> >
> > It would be really nice if garkin or hobbes could grab gcj-4.1 and get
> > cranking on it. Roman says that we need it to fix our java problems.
>
> O
On Wed, Sep 27, 2006 at 09:11:50PM -0700, Brian Morris wrote:
> as far as 68k goes, i have tried a couple test things:
> 1) using emile rescue disk to boot about triples my machines speed,
Is that the Debian-packaged version? On what machine?
> (it expands to a mini system on a ram disk of about
On Tue, Oct 03, 2006 at 06:21:37PM +0200, Christian T. Steigies wrote:
> I uploaded those packages anyway, which will probably allows us to build a
> couple more packages?
Unfortunately, they will be rejected -- dak requires binary packages to
be of the latest available version.
--
Home is wher
On Tue, Oct 17, 2006 at 01:42:07PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 17, 2006 at 11:55:02PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > It's with some regret that I have to confirm that m68k is not going to be a
> > release architecture for etch.
>
> > We have also asked about removing m68k from tes
Hi all,
So now that the release team has officially declared the m68k port not
part of the release anymore, we need to find out what we want to do with
our port. I guess it's pretty clear, at least on our end, that we do
want to release something which will be as close to etch as possible;
the que
On Tue, Oct 17, 2006 at 10:27:50AM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> I don't care either way whether m68k is released in etch. But I do
> care that etch isn't screwed because of a desperate attempt to support
> m68k in it.
[...]
> m68k, while the actual porting team manifestly does not have the
On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 03:43:03AM +0200, Roman Zippel wrote:
> The point is that m68k gets kicked out _before_ any alternative has been
> implemented.
Well, yeah, but it's not because we weren't given a fair chance. I'm not
happy about this any more than you are, but this doesn't help. Sorry.
P
On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 07:00:21PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 09:49:50AM +0200, Ingo Juergensmann wrote:
> > Oh well...
> > It doesn't meet the release criteria because of the toolchain problems, that
> > have now been solved.
>
> No, it hasn't. You need to be reliably
On Fri, Oct 20, 2006 at 09:42:31AM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> Dear Debian 68k porters,
>
> I successfully build pari under aranym using distcc and gcc-cross
> running on the host.
That's good, but I'm not sure it's a good idea to rely on this. gcc
build systems have been known to break in reg
sers can use and that we can build security
support packages for would be nice.
>(d) try to release with etch+1, possibly with coldfire support
s/possibly/presumably/
> The m68k certification pages on the wiki suggest it might be good to
> have acks/naks from:
>
>1. Wouter Verh
-equivalent release for m68k
> > I'd like to keep that option, at least to build a release of our own
> > design (maybe leaving out some tough stuff; at the very least something
> > you can install and then work from).
>
> On Sun, Oct 22, 2006 at 02:37:04AM +0200, Wouter
On Fri, Oct 27, 2006 at 05:55:13PM +0200, Michael Schmitz wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Oct 2006, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > > Isn't it going to be so that we'd be able to do our own
> > > arch-specific NMUs in both cases? Or is it in both cases going to be a
> > > matter of deciding which package will be part
On Mon, Oct 30, 2006 at 01:46:24PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> Wouter? Michael?
Sorry. Ack, on all this. It sounds like the best thing to do.
Now all I need is to make some time to figure out how all this is
supposed to work, and I can jump in.
--
Home is where you have to wash the dishes.
Hi,
I'm trying to build emile so that the changes which are in subversion
currently (and which are numerous) could make it into etch.
Unfortunately, that's not working for some reason. It says this:
first.S:23:Error: selected processor does not have all features of selected
architecture
where f
On Wed, Nov 08, 2006 at 10:03:33PM +0100, Laurent Vivier wrote:
> According the error, you should try to remove the line ".chip 68000",
> it's only to make emile working on mac classic.
Ah. Silly me. Of course...
Thanks. Though I still wonder why it was working in the past...
--
Home is wher
On Wed, Nov 08, 2006 at 10:46:05PM +0100, Laurent Vivier wrote:
>
> Le 8 nov. 06 à 22:21, Wouter Verhelst a écrit :
>
> >On Wed, Nov 08, 2006 at 10:03:33PM +0100, Laurent Vivier wrote:
> >>According to the error, you should try to remove the line ".chip
> >&
On Thu, Nov 09, 2006 at 02:14:51PM +0100, Richard Zidlicky wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 09, 2006 at 12:11:13AM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > Well, it works until I reach second/MMU030_asm.S; the same error occurs
> > there, and I obviously can't comment it out (since then the pm
On Fri, Nov 10, 2006 at 11:06:50AM +0100, Petr Stehlik wrote:
> Michael Schmitz wrote:
> >Nothing is ever perfect. Console yourself with the thought that even
> >Motorola got that page boundary crossing on exceptions thing horribly
> >wrong in their 040LC series :-)
>
> Really?
Yes. You can't ru
On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 09:03:03AM -0600, Tony Mantler wrote:
> Hmm, helps if I remember to hit 'reply all'
>
> On 13-Nov-06, at 10:58 AM, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>
> >On Fri, Nov 10, 2006 at 11:06:50AM +0100, Petr Stehlik wrote:
> >>Michael Schmitz wrote:
Hi,
I created a page on the Debian Wiki[1] that attempts to list the
Apple hardware that is supported by the Debian EMILE packages, with the
intention of advising users whether or not their hardware is properly
supported by EMILE.
Unfortunately that list is still pretty short as of this moment. I
Hi all,
Sorry for being rather offline-ish this last week. My mail setup was
broken following a Belgacom fuckup. I noticed Michael (or someone else)
signed logs for me in the mean time; thanks for that. I'll clean up on
arrakis and kiivi later, and take up signing again.
Hopefully this won't happ
[catching up on my huge mail backlog...]
On Sun, Nov 26, 2006 at 09:33:48PM +0100, Christian T. Steigies wrote:
> For the mac, there exists no directory in the install folder, ie no Penguin
> boot loader, no bootargs, only the kernel image. Is this enough to boot a
> mac with emile? I did not find
On Tue, Nov 28, 2006 at 08:00:23PM +0100, Petr Stehlik wrote:
> Goswin von Brederlow píše v Po 27. 11. 2006 v 13:16 +0100:
> > I tried out aranym (sid version) this weekend with the etch hd-image
> > from the homepage and it looked fine. But when trying to upgrade I got
> > illegal instructions on
On Fri, Dec 15, 2006 at 12:46:30AM +0100, Alfred G. de Wijn wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> In two few weeks I will be moving from the Netherlands to the US. I
> will not be able to take my two vintage Macintoshes with me, so I'm
> putting them up for donation. I have the following hardware:
>
> - Ma
On Thu, Dec 21, 2006 at 10:26:10AM +1100, Michael Tomkins wrote:
> It is unlikely that Apple will release the driver under GPL, this is
> what Debian policy requires for inclusion in offical images. AFAIK
No; what's required is the source to the driver, and the license to
modify and/or redistrib
On Wed, Dec 20, 2006 at 05:08:35PM +, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > CPU: Double bus fault detected !
> > CPU: Halting
> >
> > after that, it quits :(
>
> Check your DISPLAY setting is correct.
No, that's not the issue. I see it open a window which gets closed upon
receiving that error message.
On Mon, Jan 22, 2007 at 11:54:17PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote:
> Hello Debian-68k people,
>
> I get an offer for a Pentium 4/ 2400MHZ/ 1024Mb RAM
> for the Debian-68k port from Joerg.
>
> Given the spec, the machine can serve as a aranym buildd, a distcc
> server or both.
>
> So where do we hos
On Thu, Jan 25, 2007 at 02:12:17PM +0300, Sergei Golovan wrote:
> So, the question is the following: Are global variables supposed to be
> always aligned?
All memory access in m68k must be aligned to a 2-byte boundary.
> Is this a bug in GCC that it doesn't align the variable? Or is this a
> bug
On Thu, Feb 01, 2007 at 08:28:29AM -0600, Stephen R Marenka wrote:
> How many buildds would we add if could get all the ones we'd like to
> have registered? I mean the ones we'd really leave in rotation.
* Ska is currently down, because I've been too lazy to reinstall it
during the last half yea
On Thu, Feb 08, 2007 at 10:30:16PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 08, 2007 at 01:33:27PM -0600, Stephen R Marenka wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 07:11:43PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > > Dear Debian 68k porters,
> > >
> > > Etch now include gcc-4.1 4.1.1-21 for all plateform.
On Fri, Feb 09, 2007 at 03:26:00PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 09, 2007 at 03:14:31PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > Build missing binaries, I think, and upload to testing-proposed-updates
> >
> > Best ask the release team what the best way to fix that iss
On Fri, Feb 09, 2007 at 04:35:04PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 09, 2007 at 04:08:44PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > What testing-proposed-updates buildd? ;-)
>
> See <http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2006/12/msg01015.html>:
>
> Steve wrote:
>
On Fri, Feb 09, 2007 at 06:17:11PM +0100, Michael Schmitz wrote:
> > > Yes, they should be picked up as candidates by the t-p-u autobuilders
> > > and reach testing automatically.
> >
> > What I meant to say is that TTBOMK, there is no testing-proposed-updates
> > buildd for m68k.
> >
> > Could
On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 11:32:32PM +1100, Finn Thain wrote:
> I've been reading the debian installation guide, in particular the mac
> sections. I found a couple of problems.
>
> http://d-i.alioth.debian.org/manual/en.m68k/index.html
>
>
> --- Section 4.3.4 says "There is no MacOS application t
On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 11:50:17PM +1100, Finn Thain wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Feb 2007, Ingo Juergensmann wrote:
>
> > How will the m68k cope with the glibc problem for Lenny in the future?
> > How is the Coldfire port going on?
>
> I think Aranym is a better prospect than ColdFire. Without revisitin
On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 01:03:15PM +0100, Ingo Juergensmann wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Well, I just had a discussion about m68k and the Etch release.
>
> My question is now:
> What is the *exact* plan for m68k for Etch and beyond? Was there any action
> yet to ship our own Etch release? Is there the infr
On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 05:15:55PM +0100, Christian T. Steigies wrote:
> It would be nice if you could provide step-by-step instructions on how to
> get a working system, I gave up after I could not get nfsroot to work.
It was pretty straightforward for me. The ISO image which you can
download fro
On Sat, Feb 24, 2007 at 09:02:53AM +1100, Finn Thain wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Feb 2007, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 11:50:17PM +1100, Finn Thain wrote:
> > > On Fri, 23 Feb 2007, Ingo Juergensmann wrote:
> > >
> > > > How will the m68
On Sun, Feb 25, 2007 at 05:29:02PM +0100, Roman Zippel wrote:
> On Sat, 24 Feb 2007, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > At this point, though, I'm still convinced that it's possible to create
> > a port which will work on both coldfire and "classic" m68k; and with a
&g
On Mon, Feb 26, 2007 at 02:53:52PM +0100, Roman Zippel wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Feb 2007, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > > It's probably not impossible, but I highly question whether it's really
> > > desirable. The instructions sets are already quite different
> >
&
Hi,
James Troup was at FOSDEM this weekend, and we talked a bit about the
m68k situation there, amongst others. My first question was about the
state of our buildd addition requests, and whether it was on purpose or
so that none of them had been granted yet. He basically apologised for
not acting
On Sun, Feb 25, 2007 at 05:09:00PM +0100, Roman Zippel wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, 23 Feb 2007, Ingo Juergensmann wrote:
>
> > My question is now:
> > What is the *exact* plan for m68k for Etch and beyond?
>
> IMO as long as there are few people who have the power to veto m68k out of
> existence,
On Mon, Feb 26, 2007 at 01:39:28AM -0800, Brian Morris wrote:
> what i understood from reading about coldfire:
>
> it is 10x faster than 68060 (not fast by today's standards,
> but still capable if not unreasonable about demand from it)
>
> it is problematic in some floating point areas
> -- not
On Tue, Feb 27, 2007 at 04:36:11PM +0100, Michael Schmitz wrote:
[...]
> > Later on, we talked about us not being part of etch, and what we could
> > do about that (basically, he asked me whether we were okay with him
> > dropping all m68k packages from stable once it released, which I
> > denied).
On Thu, Mar 01, 2007 at 10:05:55AM +1100, Finn Thain wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Feb 2007, Ingo Juergensmann wrote:
> > I think most of the Debian m68k porters would prefer to stay with Debian
> > instead of another distro. Just an assumption... ;)
>
> Yes, but I'll say it anyway: Gentoo gives you suffic
On Fri, Mar 02, 2007 at 10:24:55AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
[gentoo]
> > Only partially so. I once tried it, it wasn't even remotely useful.
>
> I guess the Debian build daemons have more RAM/disk than the average machine
On Sat, Mar 03, 2007 at 07:37:15PM +0100, Roman Zippel wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Feb 2007, Stephen R Marenka wrote:
> > To me it seems clear that compiling all of kde and gnome to run on
> > traditional m68k hardware is a waste of time and cycles. However,
> > how do we carve up the dependency tree so th
On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 11:28:25AM +1100, Finn Thain wrote:
> What kernel is jazz running?
The 2.2 from sarge.
> What kind of stability issues does the machine have?
panics under load. I once also had kswapd segfault (see
http://grep.be/blog/en/computer/debian/m68k/jazz_oops)
> Does there exist
On Thu, Mar 15, 2007 at 08:02:15PM -0500, Stephen R Marenka wrote:
> non-free packages are not generally autobuilt. I recall something about
> an effort to autobuild certain non-free packages, but I don't recall the
> details.
>
> I'm cc'ing debian-68k, someone there likely knows more than I.
The
On Sat, Mar 17, 2007 at 04:36:13PM +1100, Finn Thain wrote:
> Soft power doesn't work. Don't know whether it used to work in the 2.2
> kernel.
It doesn't on mine.
--
Home is where you have to wash the dishes.
-- #debian-devel, Freenode, 2004-09-22
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTEC
On Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 01:19:25PM +1000, Finn Thain wrote:
> Well, I was hoping that perhaps you could get access to the machine. We
> know the approximate date of the crash (24th May 2006) we can probably
> find the symbol in one of the kernels installed at the time. But then
> again, you may
Hi all,
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
cha
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 b
On Mon, Apr 09, 2007 at 06:59:20AM -0700, DataZap wrote:
> Hi,
>
> With few exceptions (like the kernel) NetBSD is binary compatible across
> the 68k ports. Is there a simple way to make this work in linux?
I'm not sure I understand your question. Could you elaborate?
--
Home is where you have
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
s we ought to make sure that buildd hosts
which still run 2.2 are either replaced or upgraded now.
--
Wouter Verhelst
NixSys BVBA
Louizastraat 14, 2800 Mechelen
T: +32 15 27 69 50 / F: +32 15 27 69 51 / M: +32 486 836 198
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsu
On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 05:32:30PM -0700, Brian Morris wrote:
> my point is that IMHO there would be
> far less chance of debian-68k discontinuing if
> lenny were moved to debian-netbsd-68k instead
> of debian-linux-68k. that would be just for the new
> unstable/testing.
That may be true, but it's
On Sat, Apr 21, 2007 at 04:13:00PM +1000, Finn Thain wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 20 Apr 2007, Stephen R Marenka wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 11:27:44AM +1000, Finn Thain wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, 19 Apr 2007, Brian Morris wrote:
> > >
> > > > ps. thanks for NOT posting here where we can get th
On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 05:24:35AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> - gcc-4.2 needs all the m68k patches be reenabled, which were applied
> to gcc-4.1. If the package builds, it may break m68k as gcc-4.1 did
> during the etch release cycle.
I'm working on that currently. The main issue I have is
401 - 500 of 524 matches
Mail list logo
