Re: ppc64 biarch toolchain and 64bit powerpc kernels ...
On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 01:35:26PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 07:09:51PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > > Or should i rely on the ubuntu toolchain, and use that to upload kernels > > to sid in the near future ? > > *NO.* There is no excuse for uploading packages to unstable/main that can't > be built using Debian! So, when will i get a biarch toolchain in debian ? The alternative being naturally to maintain a fork in people.debian.org, which could be done, but will be a mess or whatever. At least having the stuff in experimental ASAP would be a first step, but i have not yet gotten any feedback on this, nor any plan to get it implemented or whatever. In any case, i do *not* plan to do any further upload of sid kernels without pure 64bit support. BTW, it seems that as a result of our little support on this, IBM has apparently donated a couple of boxes to debian, or at least thought so, who ended up being the augsbourg university ones. I would love to know who inside debian was involved in this. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ppc64 biarch toolchain and 64bit powerpc kernels ...
On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 07:09:51PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > Or should i rely on the ubuntu toolchain, and use that to upload kernels > to sid in the near future ? *NO.* There is no excuse for uploading packages to unstable/main that can't be built using Debian! -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: ppc64 biarch toolchain and 64bit powerpc kernels ...
On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 07:45:08PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 07:36:08PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 07:16:02PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 07:09:51PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > > > > timeframe to get a ppc64 biarch toolchain in sid or even experimental ? > > > > Or > > > > should i rely on the ubuntu toolchain, and use that to upload kernels > > > > to sid > > > > in the near future ? Together with a statically built procps naturally ? > > > > > > The sid procpc works just fine with ppc64 kernel, no need to mess with > > > it at all. > > > > Oh, fine, so there is no risk of overflow of the process id. > > The process id in Linux is always 32bits, and unless you tweak > /proc/sys/kernel/pid-max the actual range used is even smaller. > > > What about the sarge procps ? > > It shouldn't be any different. I have been running ppc64 kernels with > sarge for a long time. And if there's a bug in procps somewhere where > it can't deal with some fields beeing bigger in 64bit kernels that > should be fixed in procps instead of needing another set of binaries. Ok, fine with me, you are the expert. Did you try already the kernels and stuff i announced on : http://people.debian.org/~luther/ppc64/PPC64.README It didn't get the interest i expected, but maybe just because people didn't really notice. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ppc64 biarch toolchain and 64bit powerpc kernels ...
On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 07:36:08PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 07:16:02PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 07:09:51PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > > > timeframe to get a ppc64 biarch toolchain in sid or even experimental ? Or > > > should i rely on the ubuntu toolchain, and use that to upload kernels to > > > sid > > > in the near future ? Together with a statically built procps naturally ? > > > > The sid procpc works just fine with ppc64 kernel, no need to mess with > > it at all. > > Oh, fine, so there is no risk of overflow of the process id. The process id in Linux is always 32bits, and unless you tweak /proc/sys/kernel/pid-max the actual range used is even smaller. > What about the sarge procps ? It shouldn't be any different. I have been running ppc64 kernels with sarge for a long time. And if there's a bug in procps somewhere where it can't deal with some fields beeing bigger in 64bit kernels that should be fixed in procps instead of needing another set of binaries. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ppc64 biarch toolchain and 64bit powerpc kernels ...
On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 07:16:02PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 07:09:51PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > > timeframe to get a ppc64 biarch toolchain in sid or even experimental ? Or > > should i rely on the ubuntu toolchain, and use that to upload kernels to sid > > in the near future ? Together with a statically built procps naturally ? > > The sid procpc works just fine with ppc64 kernel, no need to mess with > it at all. Oh, fine, so there is no risk of overflow of the process id. What about the sarge procps ? Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ppc64 biarch toolchain and 64bit powerpc kernels ...
On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 07:09:51PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > timeframe to get a ppc64 biarch toolchain in sid or even experimental ? Or > should i rely on the ubuntu toolchain, and use that to upload kernels to sid > in the near future ? Together with a statically built procps naturally ? The sid procpc works just fine with ppc64 kernel, no need to mess with it at all. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ppc64 biarch toolchain and 64bit powerpc kernels ...
Hello, Now that sarge is released, and we are concentrating on the upcoming etch release, as shown with the new c++ toolchain announcement from doko, i plan to retire the 32bit kernels for power3 and power4, and to pass as soon as possible to 64bit kernels for those arches. I have already built a -pseries version, which altough not power4 optimized, will run on everything but legacy iseries (those predating the power5 ones), which was successfully tested on both pmacs G5 (a dying race now it seems though), and IBM power5 boxes (altough the ones with logical partitions still seem to be somewhat buggy). And plan to do a -legacy-iseries build as well as a power4 optimized version in the near future. These kernels where built in a sarge chroot using the ubuntu biarch ppc64 toolchain, and i am already building .udebs for those kernels, as well as daily d-i images, and have an unofficial .udeb archive which will provide those .udebs. I lacked time to patch base-installer and net-fetcher or whatever it is called to get the .udebs from there though, and would like these packages to get integrated in sid and then etch as fast as possible, to make testing of this stuff easier. So, i would like to ask the debian toolchain maintainers what is the expected timeframe to get a ppc64 biarch toolchain in sid or even experimental ? Or should i rely on the ubuntu toolchain, and use that to upload kernels to sid in the near future ? Together with a statically built procps naturally ? Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
