On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 12:49:02PM +0100, Jessica Clarke wrote: > On 22 Jun 2021, at 12:45, Dmitry Chagin <dcha...@freebsd.org> wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 12:36:26PM +0100, Jessica Clarke wrote: > >> On 22 Jun 2021, at 12:01, Dmitry Chagin <dcha...@freebsd.org> wrote: > >>> On Mon, Jun 21, 2021 at 10:56:38PM +0100, Jessica Clarke wrote: > >>>> On 21 Jun 2021, at 17:56, Dmitry Chagin <dcha...@freebsd.org> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> The branch main has been updated by dchagin: > >>>>> > >>>>> URL: > >>>>> https://cgit.FreeBSD.org/src/commit/?id=e013e36939ac87b53195370fb5e29f29c1a4b5c6 > >>>>> > >>>>> commit e013e36939ac87b53195370fb5e29f29c1a4b5c6 > >>>>> Author: Dmitry Chagin <dcha...@freebsd.org> > >>>>> AuthorDate: 2021-06-22 05:32:39 +0000 > >>>>> Commit: Dmitry Chagin <dcha...@freebsd.org> > >>>>> CommitDate: 2021-06-22 05:32:39 +0000 > >>>>> > >>>>> linux(4): Get rid of Linuxulator kernel build options. > >>>>> > >>>>> Stop confusing people, retire COMPAT_LINUX and COMPAT_LINUX32 kernel > >>>>> build options. Since we have 32 and 64 bit Linux emulators, we can't > >>>>> build both > >>>>> emulators together into the kernel. I don't think it matters, Linux > >>>>> emulation > >>>>> depends on loadable modules (via rc). > >>>>> > >>>>> Cut LINPROCFS and LINSYSFS for consistency. > >>>> > >>>> I don’t see why these two should be deleted? They currently build fine, > >>>> and GNU/kFreeBSD kernels enable them. They might work as modules, but I > >>>> would worry that too many parts of userland would try and read them > >>>> before /etc/init.d/kldutils (the init script that loads modules) loads > >>>> them, so then we’d have to mess around with GRUB configs to preload > >>>> them. If the options work, please leave them in. > >>>> > >>> > >>> both FS modules depend on linux.ko on i386 or linux_common.ko on amd64, > >>> so it doesn't make sense to have options for them > >> > >> But that still worked, and was even in NOTES so being tested by LINT. > >> > >>>> There’s a separate debate of whether this is the “right” fix for > >>>> COMPAT_LINUX*; arguably that *should* work and it’s a bug that they > >>>> don’t, not a feature, even if it’s not of much interest to support… > >>>> > >>>> I’d like to see the second half reverted, please, and believe the first > >>>> should be too, but I feel less strongly about that. > >>>> > >>> > >>> I think that descendants should adapt to upstream, esp since there is no > >>> KBI or ABI breakage. btw, debian wiki says gnu/kFreeBSD unmaintained > >>> since 2014. That is the reason to worry about dead project? > >> > >> As the current maintainer this is news to me. I see no such comment on > >> the port’s wiki page[1]. > >> > >> Jess > >> > >> [1] https://wiki.debian.org/Debian_GNU/kFreeBSD > >> > > I read: https://www.debian.org/ports/kfreebsd-gnu/index.en.html > > That doesn’t say unmaintained, that says not officially supported. It’s > the equivalent of Tier 1 vs not Tier 1 in FreeBSD, and falls into the > same category as powerpc, ppc64 and riscv64, among other architectures. > It just means that there are no stable releases, only unstable > (-CURRENT equivalent). >
ah, ok. I understood. nice to meet you:) some years ago i tried to rewrite compat/linux/* with Elf(function), this is so terrible... the cost of this is much more significant than kernel options removal. btw, could you please subscribe to Linux emulation on a phab? You comments are needful, but its better to get them before commit. _______________________________________________ dev-commits-src-main@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/dev-commits-src-main To unsubscribe, send any mail to "dev-commits-src-main-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
