Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.kernel > #60478

Bug#886693: linux: please reinstate ia64 for the linux kernel package

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] - view raw

Control: tag -1 - moreinfo
Control: tag -1 pending

I got fed up of seeing ia64 build failures so I've re-added ia64
configurations on the master branch.

On Wed, 2018-01-17 at 01:20 +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> Control: tag -1 moreinfo
> 
> On Mon, 2018-01-08 at 19:04 -0500, Jason Duerstock wrote:
> > Source: linux
> > Severity: normal
> > Tags: patch
> > 
> > Dear Maintainer,
> > 
> > As you may be aware, the ia64 architecture has recently been added
> > back to Debian, but now resides in Debian ports.
> > The attached patch should enable the linux package to build the ia64
> > kernel again.
> > 
> > Thanks for your time!
> 
> This appears to be almost exactly reverting the change I made to remove
> ia64 support, which is not the right thing to do.
> 
> You need to actually review the changes that have happened in the 2.5
> years since then and update the config accordingly.  In particular, the
> following symbols no longer exist in Linux 4.15-rc8:
> 
> CONFIG_BLK_CPQ_CISS_DA
> CONFIG_BLK_CPQ_DA
> CONFIG_CISS_SCSI_TAPE
> CONFIG_I2O
> CONFIG_I2O_BLOCK
> CONFIG_I2O_CONFIG
> CONFIG_I2O_PROC
> CONFIG_I2O_SCSI
> CONFIG_MMTIMER
> CONFIG_SCSI_DC390T

I deleted all of these from the configuration.

> The commit message for the removal of CONFIG_MMTIMER upstream (commit
> 07903ada96139ced48f2f893fe57a26a8fbc6043) implies that SGI SN2 systems
> are no longer supported, in which case presumably the sn-modules udeb
> should also be removed.

I was confused about this; there evidently is still general support for
SN2 systems.

> Do Itanium systems typically have floppy drives?  If not, delete the
> "suggests: fdutils" from debian/config/ia64/defines.

I've done this.

> Shouldn't the "mckinley" configuration be renamed, since it's supposed
> to support later processors as well?
>
> Does it still make sense to build an "itanium" configuration, given how
> few Merced systems exist?

I've left the flavour names as they are but changed their descriptions.

> Also, do you have any idea whether these bugs have been fixed upstream:
> 
>     https://bugs.debian.org/679545

This seems to be unfixed (the patches weren't applied upstream).

>     https://bugs.debian.org/691576

This seems to have been a gcc bug that is now fixed.

>     https://bugs.debian.org/728706

Unknown.

> If not, those should be reopened when ia64 is enabled again.

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings
Quantity is no substitute for quality, but it's the only one we've got.

Back to linux.debian.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Bug#886693: linux: please reinstate ia64 for the linux kernel package Jason Duerstock <jason.duerstock@gmail.com> - 2018-01-09 01:10 +0100
  Bug#886693: linux: please reinstate ia64 for the linux kernel package Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> - 2018-01-17 02:30 +0100
    Bug#886693: linux: please reinstate ia64 for the linux kernel package Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> - 2018-03-15 22:00 +0100
  Processed: Re: Bug#886693: linux: please reinstate ia64 for the  linux kernel package "Debian Bug Tracking System" <owner@bugs.debian.org> - 2018-01-17 02:30 +0100
  Processed: Re: Bug#886693: linux: please reinstate ia64 for the  linux kernel package "Debian Bug Tracking System" <owner@bugs.debian.org> - 2018-03-15 22:00 +0100

csiph-web