GLIBC moved mips to Ports

GLIBC moved mips to Ports

[Jim Gifford]

Just an FYI, I've been working trying to keep MIPS updated in glibc. 
Again some changes were made that broke the MIPS build with the current 
snapshot. I guess all of Daniel's and my work just got thrown away. As 
of today MIPS is no longer going to be support in trunk. Here's the 
message I received today.

In my opinion this seems to mean that MIPS is not a high priority in 
their book.

------- Additional Comments From roland at gnu dot org  2006-02-21 02:14 -------
For the trunk, mips has moved to the ports repository.
Daniel should be able to commit his fixes there directly.
Items needing merge in the 2.3 branch can be reassigned to me.

-- What |Removed |Added 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
AssignedTo|drepper at redhat dot com |drow at false dot org Status|NEW 
|ASSIGNED Component|nptl |ports 
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2340 ------- You are 
receiving this mail because: ------- You reported the bug, or are 
watching the reporter.


-- 
----
Jim Gifford
maillist@jg555.com

Re: GLIBC moved mips to Ports

[Daniel Jacobowitz]

On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 07:54:44PM -0800, Jim Gifford wrote:
> Just an FYI, I've been working trying to keep MIPS updated in glibc. 
> Again some changes were made that broke the MIPS build with the current 
> snapshot. I guess all of Daniel's and my work just got thrown away. As 
> of today MIPS is no longer going to be support in trunk. Here's the 
> message I received today.
> 
> In my opinion this seems to mean that MIPS is not a high priority in 
> their book.
> 
> ------- Additional Comments From roland at gnu dot org  2006-02-21 02:14 
> -------
> For the trunk, mips has moved to the ports repository.
> Daniel should be able to commit his fixes there directly.
> Items needing merge in the 2.3 branch can be reassigned to me.

Sigh.  Jim, you are slightly misinterpreting this.

MIPS has _never_ been a high priority of the glibc maintainers.  What
happened here is that they admitted it - and moved it to a separate
repository so that (A) they don't need to deal with it, and (B) people
who are interested can deal with it.  It's unfortunate, but realistic.

The ports repository is going to continue to be supported and we're
going to keep it working.  We just have to do the legwork.  I'll go
over the MIPS build fixes this week sometime.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery

Re: GLIBC moved mips to Ports

[Ralf Baechle]

On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 09:42:11AM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:

> Sigh.  Jim, you are slightly misinterpreting this.
> 
> MIPS has _never_ been a high priority of the glibc maintainers.  What
> happened here is that they admitted it - and moved it to a separate
> repository so that (A) they don't need to deal with it, and (B) people
> who are interested can deal with it.  It's unfortunate, but realistic.
> 
> The ports repository is going to continue to be supported and we're
> going to keep it working.  We just have to do the legwork.  I'll go
> over the MIPS build fixes this week sometime.

Great.  None of my patches in the past years has even received any sort
of feedback.  Maybe time to to look through them again ...

Leave waiting for 386 and gang to move to glibc ports as well.

  Ralf