
| Msg # 32 of 86 on ZZLI4428, Friday 9-04-25, 2:00 |
| From: SEBASTIAN ANDRZEJ SIEWIOR |
| To: JOHN PAUL ADRIAN GLAUBITZ |
| Subj: Re: Removing dpkg arch definitions for p |
XPost: linux.debian.ports.powerpc From: sebastian@breakpoint.cc On 2025-09-03 14:27:14 [+0200], John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > Hi Sebastian, Hi Adrian, > FWIW, LLVM still fully supports powerpcspe, so it's not actually a dead > end. There is also some interest in the community as several New Amiga > boards used PowerPCSPE-based CPUs. Interesting that new e500 based boards are made. It is probably one of the last available CPUs capable of doing 32bit powerpc. But reading Amiga I would expect m68k based CPUs not powerpc (especially this one). Color me surprised. Anyway. Realistically speaking you would need 8GiB+ of RAM for a buildd machine and you would need to boostrap the whole port probably from scratch as of today. But with llvm only. This could be a challenge already hoping you don't run into any compiler bugs as we did back then. Oh. glibc. You need a C library and glibc is probably what you want but https://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=commit;h=a053e8784940 0f7070cf92890e546057236c9c9 support has been removed here, too. And kernel support but if it is p2020 based, it shouldn't be that complicated. > So, unless it's really necessary to remove it, I would suggest to keep powerpcspe. This is entirely Guillem, I have obviously no saying in this. Also I don't want to take a project away from anyone. I just tried to show how much work is probably needed if anyone wants to bring this back to life. And two key projects dropped their support. > Adrian Sebastian --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2) |
328,091 visits
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca