Re: Usage of real m68k hardware
- Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2018 10:20:18 +0200
- From: Carsten Strotmann <carsten@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: Usage of real m68k hardware
(excluded debian-68k@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, as I've posted this text already
there in mistake. Re-Posted here for completeness)
On 28.03.18 08:38, Andreas Tille wrote:
> recently some R packages received bugs that seem to stem from a problem
> with the build setup (specifically, a qemu bug). When I asked back in
> one of the bugs whether there are real m68k users I've got the answer
> ... there are still some users with actual hardware, but the
> autobuilders use qemu for better performance and/or reliability
> I conclude that the Debian project is running no real m68k hardware any
> more (please correct me if I'm wrong) and we are possibly doing a
> service for some users who potentially also run qemu (wild guess of
> mine). I'm wondering when it might be time to fully drop a hardware
> port instead of draining developer time for ethernity.
> I'm personally drawng the decision that I will tag any bug that concerns
> scientific software (which is my main focus) and that bug is on m68k
> only as wontfix and will set severity to minor. I'm sorry but my focus
> is on real use cases and stumbling upon bugs in BTS which are not
> helping any real user is just draining time.
I use m68k Debian on real m68k hardware (but not R or other scientific
software). I know at least four other people that also run/use Debian
m68k on real hardware.
My focus use of m68k is tools and development software (interpreters,
Supporting diverse hardware platforms can expose bugs that are hidden on
mainstream platforms (such as x86 and ARM) and increase the overall code
quality. But I agree that the m68k community is quite small.