[Buildroot] [PATCH] DEVELOPERS: concentrate on uClibc

[Buildroot] [PATCH] DEVELOPERS: concentrate on uClibc

[Waldemar Brodkorb]

Signed-off-by: Waldemar Brodkorb <wbx@openadk.org>
---
 DEVELOPERS | 5 -----
 1 file changed, 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/DEVELOPERS b/DEVELOPERS
index 3a4ad60..45a8979 100644
--- a/DEVELOPERS
+++ b/DEVELOPERS
@@ -1952,11 +1952,6 @@ N:	Wade Berrier <wberrier@gmail.com>
 F:	package/ngrep/
 
 N:	Waldemar Brodkorb <wbx@openadk.org>
-F:	arch/Config.in.m68k
-F:	arch/Config.in.or1k
-F:	arch/Config.in.sparc
-F:	package/glibc/
-F:	package/mksh/
 F:	package/uclibc/
 F:	package/uclibc-ng-test/
 
-- 
2.1.4

[Buildroot] [PATCH] DEVELOPERS: concentrate on uClibc

[Thomas Petazzoni]

Hello,

On Sat, 28 Apr 2018 22:35:12 +0200, Waldemar Brodkorb wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Waldemar Brodkorb <wbx@openadk.org>
> ---
>  DEVELOPERS | 5 -----
>  1 file changed, 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/DEVELOPERS b/DEVELOPERS
> index 3a4ad60..45a8979 100644
> --- a/DEVELOPERS
> +++ b/DEVELOPERS
> @@ -1952,11 +1952,6 @@ N:	Wade Berrier <wberrier@gmail.com>
>  F:	package/ngrep/
>  
>  N:	Waldemar Brodkorb <wbx@openadk.org>
> -F:	arch/Config.in.m68k
> -F:	arch/Config.in.or1k
> -F:	arch/Config.in.sparc
> -F:	package/glibc/
> -F:	package/mksh/
>  F:	package/uclibc/
>  F:	package/uclibc-ng-test/

I understand the wish to concentrate on a smaller number of topics.
However, who is going to take care of the m68k, sparc and OpenRISC
architecture in Buildroot? I think besides you, not many people were
interested by those architectures, and they cause fairly frequent
issues at the toolchain level. Do you have a proposal here ?

Best regards,

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Bootlin (formerly Free Electrons)
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com

[Buildroot] [PATCH] DEVELOPERS: concentrate on uClibc

[Thomas Petazzoni]

Hello,

On Sat, 28 Apr 2018 22:35:12 +0200, Waldemar Brodkorb wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Waldemar Brodkorb <wbx@openadk.org>
> ---
>  DEVELOPERS | 5 -----
>  1 file changed, 5 deletions(-)

Applied to master, thanks.

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Bootlin (formerly Free Electrons)
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com

[Buildroot] [PATCH] DEVELOPERS: concentrate on uClibc

[Waldemar Brodkorb]

Hi,
Thomas Petazzoni wrote,

> Hello,
> 
> On Sat, 28 Apr 2018 22:35:12 +0200, Waldemar Brodkorb wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: Waldemar Brodkorb <wbx@openadk.org>
> > ---
> >  DEVELOPERS | 5 -----
> >  1 file changed, 5 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/DEVELOPERS b/DEVELOPERS
> > index 3a4ad60..45a8979 100644
> > --- a/DEVELOPERS
> > +++ b/DEVELOPERS
> > @@ -1952,11 +1952,6 @@ N:	Wade Berrier <wberrier@gmail.com>
> >  F:	package/ngrep/
> >  
> >  N:	Waldemar Brodkorb <wbx@openadk.org>
> > -F:	arch/Config.in.m68k
> > -F:	arch/Config.in.or1k
> > -F:	arch/Config.in.sparc
> > -F:	package/glibc/
> > -F:	package/mksh/
> >  F:	package/uclibc/
> >  F:	package/uclibc-ng-test/
> 
> I understand the wish to concentrate on a smaller number of topics.
> However, who is going to take care of the m68k, sparc and OpenRISC
> architecture in Buildroot? I think besides you, not many people were
> interested by those architectures, and they cause fairly frequent
> issues at the toolchain level. Do you have a proposal here ?

I keep responding on the build failure summary mails before a
release. The normal buildroot mails are more informative for me
then the summary for the architectures I subscribed. There I can see
if it is really specific architecture issue or the failure shows up on many
others. And I am always interested in other uClibc-ng toolchain
related issues on other exotic architectures. (microblaze, nios2, ..)

best regards
 Waldemar

[Buildroot] [PATCH] DEVELOPERS: concentrate on uClibc

[Thomas Petazzoni]

Hello,

On Tue, 1 May 2018 19:41:18 +0200, Waldemar Brodkorb wrote:

> > I understand the wish to concentrate on a smaller number of topics.
> > However, who is going to take care of the m68k, sparc and OpenRISC
> > architecture in Buildroot? I think besides you, not many people were
> > interested by those architectures, and they cause fairly frequent
> > issues at the toolchain level. Do you have a proposal here ?  
> 
> I keep responding on the build failure summary mails before a
> release. The normal buildroot mails are more informative for me
> then the summary for the architectures I subscribed. There I can see
> if it is really specific architecture issue or the failure shows up on many
> others.

Indeed, makes sense.

> And I am always interested in other uClibc-ng toolchain
> related issues on other exotic architectures. (microblaze, nios2, ..)

Great, thanks!

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Bootlin (formerly Free Electrons)
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com