Hi Garrett, Isn't it true that this platform isn't supported anyway and the biggest hurdle would be the framebuffer? I don't really have any objections to the SPARCLE code that does exist being removed as it's not very useful anyway.
Thanks Andy On Tue, 2009-10-20 at 18:31, Garrett D'Amore wrote: > I. Szczesniak wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 4:10 PM, Garrett D'Amore <gdam...@sun.com> wrote: > > > >> Hugh McIntyre wrote: > >> > >>> Garrett D'Amore wrote: > >>> > >>>> This platform is doomed from lack of resource to properly support, so we > >>>> should just remove it. > >>>> > >>> I can't comment on the webrev, but I guess the basic question is whether > >>> Tadpole are still selling Solaris laptops (their website says so, but it > >>> lists US-IIe and IIIi based products for which the CPUs may not be easily > >>> available, so the page might be old). And whether there are any issues > >>> w.r.t. Tadpole if their platform gets dropped. > >>> > >> Sun has no commitment to Tadpole to support these laptops. > >> > > > > This is Opensolaris.org, not sun.com and the ON code is shared between > > Sun and the community. > > > > Yes, and no. Its still true that Sun's C-Team and P-Teams decides what > goes in, and what comes out. Sun is still the ultimate gatekeeper, > although some say is given to the community. One place in which this > occurs is at PSARC. > > Ultimately at the end of the day it is Sun that bears the support burden > for code in ON, as the number of meaningful contributions from the > hobbyist community -- particularly in the form of device driver and > platform support -- is quite small indeed. > > Note that *nobody* commented meaningfully on the PSARC case materials I > submitted. > > > > >> Tadpole has > >> their own copy of the source, and has historically shipped their own > >> customized version of the OS, for Solaris 8, 9, and 10 at least. I do not > >> believe they are still selling US-II based systems (either US-IIe or > >> US-IIi). In any event, they can continue to provide software support on > >> their own if they still need to -- they have the sources and expertise to > >> do > >> this, as well as the experience of doing it in the past. > >> > >> Btw, their customers are primarily military in nature, and are unlikely to > >> adopt OpenSolaris anytime soon. (Most of them were still running Solaris 8 > >> the last I checked -- which was a couple of years ago.) > >> > >> > >>> For example, the ARC case 2009/538 does not really address this (and it > >>> may not be appropriate for pubic debate). > >>> > >>> Of course if the answer is "removal has been approved, and it's just a > >>> code review question" then that's a narrower issue in which case someone > >>> else needs to comment on the code review itself. > >>> > >> Removal *has* been approved, > >> > > > > which can quickly be revoked if I appeal the case. I DO have such a > > laptop and I do not like the ad hoc removal of SPARCLE support in such > > a short time frame. > > > > Actually, it would be hard for you to appeal it in a manner that would > be meaningful at this point. The reasons for this really come down to > the fact that we have never completed the support for this platform, due > to lack of resources and interest (the power button doesn't work in > OpenSolaris!), and the fact that the display is not supported under > OpenSolaris. The display will in fact not be supported under > OpenSolaris at any time, as the entire group has been defunded. > > The fact that you can use this unit under SXCE today notwithstanding, > there is no future for OpenSolaris with this hardware. (SXCE has > already been separately announced as ending with build 128. So this > unit is already effectively doomed anyway.) > > For the record, I also tried to contact Tadpole to inquire about this, > but none of my e-mails have received an answer. I think even Tadpole > has lost interest in these units at this time. > > > > >> and its just a code review at this point. > >> > > > > Garrett, > > did you ask Tadpole to comment in the ARC case? > > I tried to contact my past contacts at Tadpole (Andy Giles among them) > *before* I submitted the ARC case. I never received a reply. > > > Did you ask if any > > person in the community wishes to make a SPARC laptop distro? > > > > If any person in the community wants to do this, they can still do so. > They can take the code we already have, and start a new consolidation > based on it, with *just* support for for Tadpole (or other) SPARC > laptops. In fact, this is pretty much what Tadpole does for Solaris > 10. The code does not *need* to be in ON. > > I'm happy to supply the code separately should anyone in the community > wish to do this. > > - Garrett
_______________________________________________ opensolaris-code mailing list opensolaris-code@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/opensolaris-code
