Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 00:21:46 -0700 From: Garrett Cooper <yanefbsd@gmail.com> To: Ivan Voras <ivoras@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: "stable" ports? Message-ID: <7d6fde3d1003300021t29af95bbq6d3721c8f7d5ed3d@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <hor08a$gct$1@dough.gmane.org> References: <hoqikd$o2h$1@dough.gmane.org> <5A0E5B0A-B81F-4CCE-8E63-DAE662CD31B4@lafn.org> <hor08a$gct$1@dough.gmane.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 12:49 PM, Ivan Voras <ivoras@freebsd.org> wrote: > Doug Hardie wrote: >> >> On 29 March 2010, at 08:57, Ivan Voras wrote: >> >>> In some cases the burdens are obvious - the maintainer(s) would need to >>> e.g. maintain three versions of the ports - a random example would be >>> e.g. X.Org 7.0 for 6.x, 7.2 for 7.x and 7.4 for 8.x. Another would be >>> keeping PHP 5.2 for 7.x and 8.x and having 5.3 in the future >>> (CURRENT/9.x) branch. >> >> I am a bit concerned about your concept of maintain, being able to build= a >> port successfully, does not necessarily mean it will work properly. =A0F= or >> example, qpopper (which I maintain) has an issue where one feature does = not >> work properly on 64 bit machines where it works fine on 32 bit machines.= =A0In >> addition, there are a number of other machine types that are currently n= ot >> heavily used but might become so in the future. =A0Thats a lot of differ= ent >> combinations of hardware and OSs to keep running for the maintainers. > > It was done (in Linux), hence it can be done. If all else fails and both = the > project and the maintainer cannot find suitable build and test machines, = I'd > suggest using ONLY_FOR_ARCHS, or doing the whole "stable" dance only for > Tier 1 platforms (enumerated in > http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/articles/committers-guide/archs.html to be > i386, amd64, pc98). AFAIK from the ports POW, pc98 and i386 are too close= to > be considered separately. > > Virtualization (VirtualBox) may help maintainers test on the architecture > they don't run natively. Virtualbox only runs x86-compatible platforms: An x86 virtualization software package developed by Sun Microsystems. Distributed under either the GNU GPL or a proprietary license with additional ... That would leave arm, ia64, mips, powerpc, and sparc64 out in the cold. Maybe folks should try qemu (despite the fact that it's a buggy-ish emulator?): >From <http://wiki.qemu.org/download/qemu-doc.html>: For system emulation, the following hardware targets are supported: * PC (x86 or x86_64 processor) * ISA PC (old style PC without PCI bus) * PREP (PowerPC processor) * G3 Beige PowerMac (PowerPC processor) * Mac99 PowerMac (PowerPC processor, in progress) * Sun4m/Sun4c/Sun4d (32-bit Sparc processor) * Sun4u/Sun4v (64-bit Sparc processor, in progress) * Malta board (32-bit and 64-bit MIPS processors) * MIPS Magnum (64-bit MIPS processor) * ARM Integrator/CP (ARM) * ARM Versatile baseboard (ARM) * ARM RealView Emulation/Platform baseboard (ARM) * Spitz, Akita, Borzoi, Terrier and Tosa PDAs (PXA270 processor) * Luminary Micro LM3S811EVB (ARM Cortex-M3) * Luminary Micro LM3S6965EVB (ARM Cortex-M3) * Freescale MCF5208EVB (ColdFire V2). * Arnewsh MCF5206 evaluation board (ColdFire V2). * Palm Tungsten|E PDA (OMAP310 processor) * N800 and N810 tablets (OMAP2420 processor) * MusicPal (MV88W8618 ARM processor) * Gumstix "Connex" and "Verdex" motherboards (PXA255/270). * Siemens SX1 smartphone (OMAP310 processor) * Syborg SVP base model (ARM Cortex-A8). * AXIS-Devboard88 (CRISv32 ETRAX-FS). * Petalogix Spartan 3aDSP1800 MMU ref design (MicroBlaze). Thanks, -Garrett
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?7d6fde3d1003300021t29af95bbq6d3721c8f7d5ed3d>