Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2021 20:39:04 +0000 From: tech-lists <tech-lists@zyxst.net> To: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD 14: Poll armv6 deprecated or removed Message-ID: <YYRE6HTEaVm8%2Bsz1@ceres.zyxst.net> In-Reply-To: <B559CC04-6D09-4BC1-A182-1DA424D3134B@yahoo.com> References: <CANCZdfr_WsHbbeY6FyKxFdx7dOaFEhk%2BiJLYQ6F4rLOUuf-zRQ@mail.gmail.com> <YYJXCgH3NADcO8X5@server.rulingia.com> <YYJmVd4w/UcUkC4i@ceres.zyxst.net> <CAK7dMtAta=uv48omVA8HwnXh8VUZR_oX8_xUYSD2Y0AqfoD9zw@mail.gmail.com> <YYPzTRDcoISN8RNj@ceres.zyxst.net> <B559CC04-6D09-4BC1-A182-1DA424D3134B@yahoo.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--fg1suY5uZZpuhTEs Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Nov 04, 2021 at 11:53:18AM -0700, Mark Millard via freebsd-arch wro= te: >Without one or more developers willing to keep ARM11 based RPi* FreeBSD >working as FreeBSD updates, the code will break. Other architectures >have been removed for such. Folks that do not want to work on such code >do not want to have to work on it to keep FreeBSD building and operating >for other architectures that have active developmers/maintainers. > >If there were active FreeBSD developers for ARM11 RPi*'s, the removal >would have been unlikely to be proposed at all, even if the use was >minor. FreeBSD is driven by the developer context directly, not the >usage context directly.=20 OK. I can understand that. No developers want to work on it so no interest. That's straightforward, logical, bad for me but I can understand it and work around it. But that was not mentioned by the OP. On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 09:44:20AM -0600, Warner Losh wrote: >>Given that the number of available and useful armv6 boards has fallen >>to almost zero, the time has come to look hard at armv6. I'm objecting to this because "available and useful" is impossible=20 to measure. "Available" is going to be a very large number, because of the number of sales and popularity of these boards, and that they are durable. So stuff made years ago can logically be presumed to be still in working order. Even if 0.1% of rpi1b users used freebsd on their boards, it'll still be a big number. FreeBSD does not record anywhere=20 the context in which it is used. And "useful" depends on who is using=20 it for what and is an opinion. >NetBSD supports a lot of systems that FreeBSD does not. That fact has >never justified having support for those systems in FreeBSD.=20 I'm not saying that. What I'm asking is the reasoning. "we don't want to support it anymore" is a reason "no devs are interested" is a reason "the number of available and useful armv6 boards has fallen to almost zero" is objectively false and so therefore is not a reason. And because it is not a reason then justifications following it will also be incorrect. I'm interested to know what NetBSD's reasons are in having tier-1 support for armv6, but I'll ask that on their lists. --=20 J. --fg1suY5uZZpuhTEs Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCAAdFiEE8n3tWhxW11Ccvv9/s8o7QhFzNAUFAmGERN8ACgkQs8o7QhFz NAWPWxAArs/BbSxeLAhkRAUT1DlxrBGA8A+fQ8Nrae72TjiJQr1amMADgQpB3ADL OMWFrdp95H6L6JXHbeIoNStZHT51+yKks8XcIo6ApeLQE0BAasOXmcFUdbRnCMR1 mW3h6n4ALyvhHerp/UXpEhKH56ZddjAiZpJSDhTwsRspZjzN4OsQnSQW9ZXFps0e AjsYmoqOEMA6Tsr/Y5lFsT5kZfWRI/g6D3f9oTug2x8MOH58xjhLHzVk4bqtpUgH WI6yyFXEqYB/kMDxfRdFtNmtRurY85Wr3rioR4qPtfKV4sFetXsLjEyaYb97nwO3 AtxtDYWdjlcrIU+ljwRTU2nxtRbsDJoU2IEGLEbiVTQo16JvGB75PKeAubi8xwbt F4Cq+15CdySYq94eRZea+1vAsI7VOK3QaC4eIg8vR8TN++s756Ub190L/Au555DP 0K6WRAgH9jZHNp35RKSdDWh9+Y5WFTfz/X1Wdy2N1MWBHPKcxuRtFn4CT2Kur+UV woSX+AL63qt1U/U2h9GnbEhjZhhmYsPi+NEIzz0mQHs25m/88p8I5h4x7sUZRjXI K8fYPYzbArqwR7ssVAF1K+XLMuFQh9Ahd1rB5b3T6ax4zCozCES57DRCwM3iAfCO 4AAGmW74slTKiy063ERFiLXCxUx6qGa8+Ek1KYTsl2vul8Z5hCw= =MZeR -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --fg1suY5uZZpuhTEs--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?YYRE6HTEaVm8%2Bsz1>