From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from baythorne.infradead.org (baythorne.infradead.org [81.187.2.161]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99366687FD for ; Mon, 28 Nov 2005 22:29:02 +1100 (EST) From: David Woodhouse To: Wolfgang Denk In-Reply-To: <20051128110146.ACD2E353F54@atlas.denx.de> References: <20051128110146.ACD2E353F54@atlas.denx.de> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 11:28:55 +0000 Message-Id: <1133177335.31573.44.camel@baythorne.infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Make ARCH=ppc build again with new syscall path List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Mon, 2005-11-28 at 12:01 +0100, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > In message <1133172766.31573.14.camel@baythorne.infradead.org> you wrote: > > > > There's also a third option, which _encourages_ people to port their > > platform without necessarily making it easier: just let arch/ppc break. > > Please don't. This is supposed to be a "stable" kernel tree. I wouldn't advocate doing it just yet, but I don't think anyone really expects to see arch/ppc continue until Linus announces 2.7.0. Setting a cut-off of 2.6.17 or so, or perhaps a point in time when we officially stop caring about it, would seem a sensible approach. Neither did I suggest actively breaking it or removing it -- if you feel strongly about keeping it then I'm sure Paul would accept your patches to make it keep working, even after others have stopped bothering. But I think the time and effort required to maintain arch/ppc in perpetuity should be weighed up against that of just porting the embedded platforms to arch/powerpc. It's your choice, of course, but I personally don't think I'll be submitting many more patches which take arch/ppc into account -- this one was an exception because it was me who broke it, and it is still a _little_ too early to be letting it break, IMO. -- dwmw2