On Tuesday 24 July 2018 14:43:02 Christoph Biedl wrote: > Adrian Bunk wrote... > > > I'd like to get a clear picture regarding the situation of building > > armel for buster on arm64, ideally moving it to arm64 hardwre soon. > > JFTR, I'd appreciate if armel/armhf could continue to be part of a > release. > I'll second that, I'm using the hf variant on some r-pi 3b's. And theres millions of those around.
> > 1. What issues are considered possible problems for moving building > > armel from 32bit v7 hardware to 64bit v8 hardware? > > Perhaps just babble and FUD: There was (and probably still is) an > issue in powerpc: In a certain package, upstream's compile options for > ppc had higher CPU requirements than what Debian uses for that > architecture. As a result, the buildd (some big IBM POWER box) happily > built the package, but out there on a G4 the code would crash for > SIGILL, same when rebuilding on such a hardware. > > Now I'm somewhat afraid this might happen again when packages for > armel/armhf are built on more recent hardware. At the same time, I'd > like to see continued support for these architectures. > > If this is a concern, how to solve it? Have some native non-DSA > armel/armhf boxes where volunteers rebuild the archive and hope test > suites will catch such issues? > > My 2ยข > > Christoph -- Cheers, Gene Heskett -- "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>
