From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Hb1VM-00081P-Or
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 09 Apr 2007 17:34:28 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Hb1VM-00081D-Cg
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 09 Apr 2007 17:34:28 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Hb1VM-00081A-AB
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 09 Apr 2007 17:34:28 -0400
Received: from static-71-162-243-5.phlapa.fios.verizon.net ([71.162.243.5]
	helo=grelber.thyrsus.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps
	(TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <rob@landley.net>) id 1Hb1RU-0004h0-CC
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 09 Apr 2007 17:30:28 -0400
From: Rob Landley <rob@landley.net>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Just to add one single point
Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2007 17:26:13 -0400
References: <1176026443.1516.176.camel@rapid>
	<200704090019.55339.paul@codesourcery.com>
In-Reply-To: <200704090019.55339.paul@codesourcery.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200704091726.13240.rob@landley.net>
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Cc: Paul Brook <paul@codesourcery.com>

On Sunday 08 April 2007 7:19 pm, Paul Brook wrote:
> > Mr Paul Brook did break the PREP and heathrow machines while doing
> > changes in the PCI code. There were some posts on this list reporting
> > this and he never even tried to fix what he broke. And now he's
> > complaining "I cannot test as it does not work". Looks like a bad joke,
> > no ?
> 
> AFAIK PPC emulation hasn't *ever* worked well enough to boot without at 
least 
> building a custom linux kernel. In addition the -kernel commandline option 
> have no effect, and there is no test image available.

By the way, if this ever _does_ start to work, I'd appreciate hearing about 
it.

Right now, my build scripts are building a PowerPC kernel and ext2 filesystem 
image, using a procedure that works on arm, mips, x86, and x86-64.  It's 
producing a _result_, but I have no idea if it actually works.  I do know 
that I can't run it under qemu the way I can all the others.  (Even sparc at 
least _boots_, I think its problem is a uClibc issue.)

http://landley.net/code/firmware/downloads/image

Shell scripts to build all that from source (plus cross compilers and a 
tarball of the files in the ext2 image) are one level up.

> I stand by my original statement.
> A machine that requires building a custom kernel, maybe hacking a
> bootloader, and creating a bootable filesystem from scratch is untestable.

Well, it's certainly inconvenient.  The custom kernel I can do, the filesystem 
I've got.  But bootloaders are a bit of a weak spot with me...

Rob
-- 
Penguicon 5.0 Apr 20-22, Linux Expo/SF Convention.  Bruce Schneier, Christine 
Peterson, Steve Jackson, Randy Milholland, Elizabeth Bear, Charlie Stross...