Re: Alpha port still maintained in 2.5

Re: Alpha port still maintained in 2.5

[Hannes Reinecke]

Hi all,

appearently there are some secret channels by which one has to post his 
messages for them to actually being _read_ by someone ...

Sam wrote:
 > I recall alpha patches from others as well, but do not recall 
anything > about module support.

Well, there is this:
http://www.uwsg.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0212.2/0971.html
(Next time I'll cc' you directly :-)

But to answer the original question: _Actively_ being maintained is a 
bit of an euphemism, 'occasionally being patched' is probably more accurate.

Richard Henderson and Ivan Kokshaysky are the main men behind the port.

I try to give the port the occasional bug-fix.

Cheers,

Hannes

Re: Alpha port still maintained in 2.5

[Sam Ravnborg]

On Mon, Dec 30, 2002 at 04:07:09PM +0100, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> appearently there are some secret channels by which one has to post his 
> messages for them to actually being _read_ by someone ...

I follow lkml, but has no particular Alpha interest, so foregive me ;-)
That I do some Alpha patching is from a kbuild persepctive, not
particulary Alpha. I'm do not have tools to do so, nor any machine.

	Sam

Re: Alpha port still maintained in 2.5

[Larry McVoy]

I have a spare Alpha box (in theory I made need it some day if we ever
decide to support Tru64 but that seems like a small market).  I don't 
know how useful it is but I could put it up outside our firewall if 
that helped.  I'd have to install Linux on it and I'm booked up until
Jan 9th but if you still need it then let me know.

On Mon, Dec 30, 2002 at 04:15:31PM +0100, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 30, 2002 at 04:07:09PM +0100, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > appearently there are some secret channels by which one has to post his 
> > messages for them to actually being _read_ by someone ...
> 
> I follow lkml, but has no particular Alpha interest, so foregive me ;-)
> That I do some Alpha patching is from a kbuild persepctive, not
> particulary Alpha. I'm do not have tools to do so, nor any machine.
> 
> 	Sam
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

-- 
---
Larry McVoy            	 lm at bitmover.com           http://www.bitmover.com/lm 

Re: Alpha port still maintained in 2.5

[Sam Ravnborg]

On Mon, Dec 30, 2002 at 07:23:25AM -0800, Larry McVoy wrote:
> I have a spare Alpha box (in theory I made need it some day if we ever
> decide to support Tru64 but that seems like a small market).  I don't 
> know how useful it is but I could put it up outside our firewall if 
> that helped.  I'd have to install Linux on it and I'm booked up until
> Jan 9th but if you still need it then let me know.

Hi Larry, nice offer. But I personally would not have time hacking on Alpha.
Others may find it usefull though.

	Sam

Re: Alpha port still maintained in 2.5

[Markus Pfeiffer]

On Monday 30 December 2002 17:50, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 30, 2002 at 07:23:25AM -0800, Larry McVoy wrote:
> > I have a spare Alpha box (in theory I made need it some day if we ever
> > decide to support Tru64 but that seems like a small market).  I don't
> > know how useful it is but I could put it up outside our firewall if
> > that helped.  I'd have to install Linux on it and I'm booked up until
> > Jan 9th but if you still need it then let me know.
>
> Hi Larry, nice offer. But I personally would not have time hacking on
> Alpha. Others may find it usefull though.
>

Well, I have an Alpha System here myself and am also "hacking" on it. But one 
has also to ask oneself if there is any demand (apart from my personal 
demand) for a maintained Linux/Alpha >= 2.5...

Anyway, I just installed BitKeeper and start finding my way into the code...

Markus

Re: Alpha port still maintained in 2.5

[William Lee Irwin III]

On Monday 30 December 2002 17:50, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
>> Hi Larry, nice offer. But I personally would not have time hacking on
>> Alpha. Others may find it usefull though.

On Mon, Dec 30, 2002 at 07:13:23PM +0100, Markus Pfeiffer wrote:
> Well, I have an Alpha System here myself and am also "hacking" on it. But one 
> has also to ask oneself if there is any demand (apart from my personal 
> demand) for a maintained Linux/Alpha >= 2.5...
> Anyway, I just installed BitKeeper and start finding my way into the code...

Hmm, this box says "AlphaStation 200 4/166". Might be interesting to
get it elevated above the level of "oversized doorstop" when attempting
to run Linux on it.


Bill

Re: Alpha port still maintained in 2.5

[Jochen Friedrich]

Hi Markus,

> Anyway, I just installed BitKeeper and start finding my way into the code...

Maybe setting up an own repository (like the parisc, mips, m68k, etc
people currently do using CVS) would also be a good idea, just to test out
stuff before pushing it into the main tree and to have a common code base
to work on.

This way we could apply e.g. the module patch from kernel.org and fix the
remaining parts.

just my 0,02 EURO
--jochen

Re: Alpha port still maintained in 2.5

[Larry McVoy]

On Mon, Dec 30, 2002 at 07:20:47PM +0100, Jochen Friedrich wrote:
> Hi Markus,
> 
> > Anyway, I just installed BitKeeper and start finding my way into the code...
> 
> Maybe setting up an own repository (like the parisc, mips, m68k, etc
> people currently do using CVS) would also be a good idea, just to test out
> stuff before pushing it into the main tree and to have a common code base
> to work on.

Richard (rth) maintains some BK trees but they may be private.  If so,
maybe we can coax him into maintaining a copy on linuxalpha.bkbits.net
or on kernel.bkbits.net.
-- 
---
Larry McVoy            	 lm at bitmover.com           http://www.bitmover.com/lm 

Re: Alpha port still maintained in 2.5

[Hannes Reinecke]

Jochen Friedrich wrote:
> Hi Markus,
> 
> 
>>Anyway, I just installed BitKeeper and start finding my way into the code...
> 
> 
> Maybe setting up an own repository (like the parisc, mips, m68k, etc
> people currently do using CVS) would also be a good idea, just to test out
> stuff before pushing it into the main tree and to have a common code base
> to work on.
> 
> This way we could apply e.g. the module patch from kernel.org and fix the
> remaining parts.
> 
I'm all for it. The important bit would be to get those who really 
matter (i.e. Richard Henderson, Ivan K. et al) to cooperate with it.

Otherwise it's just a waste of time, since in doubt their patches have a 
far better chance being incorporated into the main tree than ours ...

> just my 0,02 EURO
> --jochen
Same here.

Cheers,

Hannes

Re: Sparc port still maintained in 2.5

[John Bradford]

> > > I have a spare Alpha box (in theory I made need it some day if we ever
> > > decide to support Tru64 but that seems like a small market).  I don't
> > > know how useful it is but I could put it up outside our firewall if
> > > that helped.  I'd have to install Linux on it and I'm booked up until
> > > Jan 9th but if you still need it then let me know.
> >
> > Hi Larry, nice offer. But I personally would not have time hacking on
> > Alpha. Others may find it usefull though.
> >
> 
> Well, I have an Alpha System here myself and am also "hacking" on
> it. But one has also to ask oneself if there is any demand (apart
> from my personal demand) for a maintained Linux/Alpha >= 2.5...

I'm certainly going to be interested in Linux/Sparc >= 2.5 when I can
get a Sparc machine, (I'm hoping to help work on the 'Splack'
distribution, which is basically an un-official Slackware-like
distribution for Sparcs), with the eventual aim of moving from X86 to
Sparc as my default architechture, but I'm not really interested in
Alpha.

What's the status of the 2.5 Sparc tree?

John.

Re: Sparc port still maintained in 2.5

[Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo]

Em Mon, Dec 30, 2002 at 06:27:42PM +0000, John Bradford escreveu:
> > > > I have a spare Alpha box (in theory I made need it some day if we ever
> > > > decide to support Tru64 but that seems like a small market).  I don't
> > > > know how useful it is but I could put it up outside our firewall if
> > > > that helped.  I'd have to install Linux on it and I'm booked up until
> > > > Jan 9th but if you still need it then let me know.
> > >
> > > Hi Larry, nice offer. But I personally would not have time hacking on
> > > Alpha. Others may find it usefull though.
> > >
> > 
> > Well, I have an Alpha System here myself and am also "hacking" on
> > it. But one has also to ask oneself if there is any demand (apart
> > from my personal demand) for a maintained Linux/Alpha >= 2.5...
 
> I'm certainly going to be interested in Linux/Sparc >= 2.5 when I can get a
> Sparc machine, (I'm hoping to help work on the 'Splack' distribution, which
> is basically an un-official Slackware-like distribution for Sparcs), with the

I'm doing the same for Conectiva Linux, the package recompilation is almost
done :-) But for now I'm using 2.4.20, with some oopses (similar to some
already reported on the sparclinux@vger.kernel.org mailing list that I already
reported to Uzi). 2.5-bk compiles and boots, but I couldn't access the machine
as serial console is not working and I only have a SS10 headless machine, I
plan to look into some of these issues when (if) I find time.

> eventual aim of moving from X86 to Sparc as my default architechture, but I'm
> not really interested in Alpha.
 
> What's the status of the 2.5 Sparc tree?

Zaitcev has sent an status some time ago:

http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-sparc&m=103895559102210&w=2

- Arnaldo

RE: Sparc port still maintained in 2.5

[Holzrichter, Bruce]

> 
> I'm certainly going to be interested in Linux/Sparc >= 2.5 when I can
> get a Sparc machine, (I'm hoping to help work on the 'Splack'
> distribution, which is basically an un-official Slackware-like
> distribution for Sparcs), with the eventual aim of moving from X86 to
> Sparc as my default architechture, but I'm not really interested in
> Alpha.
> 

Sparc64 is maintained by David Miller, and he actively updates it.  Some
stuff works, some doesn't.  YMMV.

Sparc32 is "unmaintened", but I have seen people working with it.  

So it depends on your choice of hardware, etc.   www.ultralinux.org is a
good starting point.

Bruce H.