[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190625112146.GA9580@angband.pl>
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2019 13:21:46 +0200
From: Adam Borowski <kilobyte@...band.pl>
To: John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaubitz@...sik.fu-berlin.de>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Yoshinori Sato <ysato@...rs.sourceforge.jp>,
Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
linux-sh@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] remove arch/sh?
On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 11:02:36AM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> On 6/25/19 10:56 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > arch/sh seems pretty much unmaintained these days. The last time I got
> > any reply to sh patches from the list maintainers, and the last maintainer
> > pull request was over a year ago, and even that has been rather sporadic.
> >
> > In the meantime we've not really seen any updates for new kernel features
> > and code seems to be bitrotting.
>
> We're still using sh4 in Debian
I wouldn't call it "used": it has popcon of 1, and despite watching many
Debian channels, I don't recall hearing a word about sh4 in quite a while.
Hardware development is dead: we were promised modern silicon by j-core
after original patents expired, but after J2 nothing happened, there was
silence from their side, and now https://j-core.org is down.
Meow!
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Packager's rule #1: upstream _always_ screws something up. This
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ is true especially if you're packaging your own project.
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀
Powered by blists - more mailing lists