On Mon, 2013-09-23 at 19:08 +0900, Carsten Haitzler wrote: > On Mon, 23 Sep 2013 12:42:34 +0300 Artem Bityutskiy > <[email protected]> said: > > > Hi JF, > > > > there is a lot of confusion in this thread about what are you going to > > do and why. > > > > And frankly, the announcement is guilty in that. You did not carefully > > and nicely explain what exactly you do, and why exactly, and which users > > would be affected and how exactly. > > > > I suggest you guys to come up with a new good survey description. Make > > sure it answers the above questions. Also, go through this thread, find > > out what confused people, and make sure you have a Q&A section in your > > new survey, and the section clears the confusion. > > > > Thanks! > > > > P.S. What I found out from talking to people, _not_ from the announce: > > > > 1. The intended change _only_ affects mic and gbs, nothing else. > > 2. The change is about stopping producing i586 mic and gbs builds. Other > > tools will still have i586 builds. > > 3. The change _does not_ mean that mic/gbs won't be able to generate > > i586 images. > > 4. On the opposite, x86_68 mic/gbs _will_ be able to generate i586 > > images. > > 5. So this will only limit people in choosing their _build host_, not > > the _target Tizen OS_. > > > > Right? > > that's what i'm assuming. :) and here i assume that tizen SHOULD be > self-hosting.
Why? :) Is Android self-hosting, for example? :-) > that means a tizen install (on a hypothetical tizen pc laptop or > a tizen tablet or phone or ivi system - who cares) SHOULD be able to, with > some > added pkgs, have gbs, mic, gcc, toolchains etc. Hypothetical Tizen PC - sure, sounds natural. Mobile/IVI? Not sure. IVI - may be (have not heard arguments or real usage stories yet), Mobile - less sure. Really, I do not know. I'd love to find this out as an outcome of this survey. :-) So if you really need to run MIC/GBS on a Phone/IVI system running Tizen, tell some about your use-case. Remember, this is also about resources. Is it best to spend time on 32-bit support now vs working on other things. > installed just like any distro, > and then i should be able to use that tizen running device (be it ix86, x86_64 > or arm or arm64) to build tizen entirely from nothing to working image > (building tizen here means build a running working target image of ix86, > x86-64, arm, arm64 or for that matter any other architectures we will end up > supporting, if any). Again, I am not sure many people would do this on a Tizen phone. And the survey was about finding out if anyone really uses a 32-bit system to build Tizen images "from nothing", would these mind to switch to a 64-bit system, etc. They need some numbers, details. > if removing support for 32bit means "giving up on qemu 32bit address space > bugs" and thus making 32bit hosts unable to run gbs etc. etc. to run a local > build to product an arbitrary architecture output, then i think that would be > embarrassing that we can't self host. I agree self-host is great and a high bar and indication of quality maturity. Are we on that level? I wish we would. But right now we do not even sign Tizen repos, and Tizen images, although it is 21st century, and people care about security. We do not sign git tags too. Do we have git history on all projects? Things like this are _more_ embarrassing to me than being not able to build a Tizen image on a Tizen phone... The latter is not even embarassing, IMHO. So I'd try to be practical and look at reality/priorities/goals and resources available. Would you like help with 32-bit issues the tools people hit? :-) -- Best Regards, Artem Bityutskiy _______________________________________________ General mailing list [email protected] https://lists.tizen.org/listinfo/general
