From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <497F4D72.1020504@domain.hid> Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2009 19:07:46 +0100 From: Philippe Gerum MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <496F12DD.40500@domain.hid> In-Reply-To: <496F12DD.40500@domain.hid> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Xenomai-core] [RESEND] State of the Xenomai/ia64 port Reply-To: rpm@xenomai.org List-Id: "Xenomai life and development \(bug reports, patches, discussions\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: xenomai-core Cc: xenomai-help Last resend before removal of the ia64 support. Philippe Gerum wrote: > It has been 2.5 years since we saw an update to the Xenomai/ia64 port, and there > is still no sign of life coming from ia64 users (do we actually have any > Xenomai/ia64 users? maybe one, a single one?). To sum up the situation: > > - our ia64 port stalled in 2.6.16. > - we had zero feedback from anyone regarding the Xenomai/ia64 port since it was > introduced in 2005 (no, I won't buy the "there was no bug to report" explanation > for this; it has been a while since Santa Claus told me he was a fake). > - there is no incentive to rejuvenate the ia64 port on my side, given that I > would definitely use PREEMPT_RT to gain real-time guarantees instead of a > co-kernel on this particular architecture. > - We did not hear of anyone having such incentive yet. > > Letting an architecture port bit rot in Xenomai is not an option, and > maintaining a useless port makes no sense. 2.5 brings in a number of new > features, and it is crucial that all of the Xenomai ports support them properly. > > If you think I'm badly wrong, utterly misinformed, or just nuts (whichever comes > first), you may want to speak up now. 2.5-rc1 is due for the first week of > February, and I plan to remove the ia64 support before our first release > candidate is out, unless somebody convinces me that I should not do that. > -- Philippe.