From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Florian Fainelli Date: Mon, 04 May 2009 12:15:01 +0000 Subject: Re: debian unusable on niagara Message-Id: <200905041415.01531.florian@openwrt.org> List-Id: References: <20090423.070943.158757350.davem@davemloft.net> In-Reply-To: <20090423.070943.158757350.davem@davemloft.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To: sparclinux@vger.kernel.org Hi, Le Monday 04 May 2009 11:12:38 Josip Rodin, vous avez =E9crit=A0: > On Mon, May 04, 2009 at 09:40:26AM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: > > As far as I can tell, the main issue is that nobody's actively working > > on the debian sparc port in the first place. And without active > > maintainers, that port is actually a disservice to users and the sparc > > linux community. > > Even if nobody is currently volunteering to explicitly state that they are > working on the port as a whole (which has always been a fairly vague > concept anyway), the software is generally working fine (yes, even if it > has bugs), the buildds are happily churning (and are actually actively > maintained), new users do actually regularly come through, so I fail to s= ee > how it's a disservice to everyone. A distribution developer should provide users with working kernels. Getting= =20 software x.y.z to work on sparc is something different. So rather than=20 disservicing anyone it is just annoying not being able to boot a kernel or = having it partially working for something as stupid as enabling/disabling t= he=20 right kernel options. > > What is that statement supposed to mean, anyway? Would you prefer if > the port didn't exist at all? No as long as there are users for it, please maintain it, but focus your=20 attention on kernels rather than geting the whole Debian package set to wor= k. My 2 cents. --=20 Best regards, Florian Fainelli Email : florian@openwrt.org http://openwrt.org -------------------------------