On 2017-08-28 06:53, Paul Wise wrote: > On Sun, Aug 27, 2017 at 9:49 PM, Roger Shimizu wrote: > > > However, I think armel is time to transit to v5. > > As someone who can no longer run Debian stable on his MIPS device due > to the CPU requirements bump in stretch, I'm not sure that bumping CPU > requirements is a good idea in general. If there are actual benefits > to v5 as the default then bumping it could be a good idea. OTOH the > only relevant hardware for armel these days seems to be RPi, so why > not make armel into armhfv6 instead?
The most relevant hardware is probably RPi 1 and RPi Zero. But there are also many ARM9EJ-S based devices used in industrial applications (hardware with long life cycles). If I'm not mistaken this is v5 without FP unit, right?
