From owner-dev-commits-src-main@freebsd.org Tue Jun 22 11:45:52 2021 Return-Path: Delivered-To: dev-commits-src-main@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 735E165C60E; Tue, 22 Jun 2021 11:45:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dchagin@heemeyer.club) Received: from heemeyer.club (heemeyer.club [IPv6:2001:19f0:6400:80a1:5054:ff:fe7a:a27d]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4G8PjX2RF6z4VRC; Tue, 22 Jun 2021 11:45:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dchagin@heemeyer.club) Received: from heemeyer.club (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by heemeyer.club (8.16.1/8.16.1) with ESMTP id 15MBjoEX049248; Tue, 22 Jun 2021 14:45:50 +0300 (MSK) (envelope-from dchagin@heemeyer.club) Received: (from dchagin@localhost) by heemeyer.club (8.16.1/8.16.1/Submit) id 15MBjonj049247; Tue, 22 Jun 2021 14:45:50 +0300 (MSK) (envelope-from dchagin) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2021 14:45:50 +0300 From: Dmitry Chagin To: Jessica Clarke Cc: "src-committers@freebsd.org" , "dev-commits-src-all@freebsd.org" , "dev-commits-src-main@freebsd.org" Subject: Re: git: e013e36939ac - main - linux(4): Get rid of Linuxulator kernel build options. Message-ID: References: <202106211656.15LGuXQU059224@gitrepo.freebsd.org> <4C0E8010-EFBF-42A5-90EF-A502E7BBD3D7@freebsd.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <4C0E8010-EFBF-42A5-90EF-A502E7BBD3D7@freebsd.org> X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4G8PjX2RF6z4VRC X-Spamd-Bar: ---- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[] X-BeenThere: dev-commits-src-main@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: Commit messages for the main branch of the src repository List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2021 11:45:52 -0000 On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 12:36:26PM +0100, Jessica Clarke wrote: > On 22 Jun 2021, at 12:01, Dmitry Chagin wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 21, 2021 at 10:56:38PM +0100, Jessica Clarke wrote: > >> On 21 Jun 2021, at 17:56, Dmitry Chagin wrote: > >>> > >>> The branch main has been updated by dchagin: > >>> > >>> URL: https://cgit.FreeBSD.org/src/commit/?id=e013e36939ac87b53195370fb5e29f29c1a4b5c6 > >>> > >>> commit e013e36939ac87b53195370fb5e29f29c1a4b5c6 > >>> Author: Dmitry Chagin > >>> AuthorDate: 2021-06-22 05:32:39 +0000 > >>> Commit: Dmitry Chagin > >>> CommitDate: 2021-06-22 05:32:39 +0000 > >>> > >>> linux(4): Get rid of Linuxulator kernel build options. > >>> > >>> Stop confusing people, retire COMPAT_LINUX and COMPAT_LINUX32 kernel > >>> build options. Since we have 32 and 64 bit Linux emulators, we can't build both > >>> emulators together into the kernel. I don't think it matters, Linux emulation > >>> depends on loadable modules (via rc). > >>> > >>> Cut LINPROCFS and LINSYSFS for consistency. > >> > >> I don’t see why these two should be deleted? They currently build fine, > >> and GNU/kFreeBSD kernels enable them. They might work as modules, but I > >> would worry that too many parts of userland would try and read them > >> before /etc/init.d/kldutils (the init script that loads modules) loads > >> them, so then we’d have to mess around with GRUB configs to preload > >> them. If the options work, please leave them in. > >> > > > > both FS modules depend on linux.ko on i386 or linux_common.ko on amd64, > > so it doesn't make sense to have options for them > > But that still worked, and was even in NOTES so being tested by LINT. > > >> There’s a separate debate of whether this is the “right” fix for > >> COMPAT_LINUX*; arguably that *should* work and it’s a bug that they > >> don’t, not a feature, even if it’s not of much interest to support… > >> > >> I’d like to see the second half reverted, please, and believe the first > >> should be too, but I feel less strongly about that. > >> > > > > I think that descendants should adapt to upstream, esp since there is no > > KBI or ABI breakage. btw, debian wiki says gnu/kFreeBSD unmaintained > > since 2014. That is the reason to worry about dead project? > > As the current maintainer this is news to me. I see no such comment on > the port’s wiki page[1]. > > Jess > > [1] https://wiki.debian.org/Debian_GNU/kFreeBSD > I read: https://www.debian.org/ports/kfreebsd-gnu/index.en.html