[Dev] do we need the [kernels], [cross], and [unmaintained] repos anymore?

Megver83 megver83 at hyperbola.info
Sat May 23 16:39:07 GMT 2020

tl;dr but I get the idea
I used to maintain linux-libre-xtreme, linux-libre-lts-xtreme,
linux-libre-rt and linux-libre-pae in [kernels], however, I removed all
of them, due to different reasons.

The point: IMO, [kernels] isn't needed. However, I've seen those kernels
you mention (linux-libre-x86_64 and others) which are maintained by
GNUtoo. I think I asked him once about their purpose, but I don't
remember if he ever answered me, or what was his answer.

[kernels] was, afaik, created by Emulatorman because he had a full
jungle of kernels, but now there are only a few, so in conclusion, I
think those kernels can be moved to [libre] and we can delete [kernels]

Regarding [cross], there used to be many outdated cross-compilers and
toolchains, which I deleted because it looked like no one was interested
on them, and no one has said anything since then. Afaik, it was used
when Parabola was ported to MIPS (or armv7? I don't remember), but
nowadays most custom toolchains go to [libre] (if they are makedepends
for a [libre] package, e.g. linux-libre-firmware) or to [pcr].

Now, about [unmaintained]: do we really need that? I mean, I totally
agree on adding it to PUR, if that can be created first, otherwise the
easiest thing would be to add those PKGBUILDs in "unmaintained" in
abslibre, but without building them, or maybe a new branch can be created?

El 23-05-20 a las 07:37, bill-auger escribió:
> i was just updating pbot's factoid about the available kernels -
> im not sure why any of these repo was ever needed really; but
> now there are only two packages in [i686/kernels] - both have
> not been updated since january - there is nothing for the other
> arches; and [cross] is empty for all arches
> * i686/kernels/linux-libre-aarch64 5.4.8
> * i686/kernels/linux-libre-x86_64 5.4.8
> i also noticed 'linux-libre-64' in [i686/libre] - that is more
> recent than the other new (undocumented) ones - is there any
> difference between 'linux-libre-64' and 'linux-libre-x86_64'? -
> and why are these only in the i686 repos?
> * i686/libre/linux-libre-64 5.6.12
> what is the use case for those foreign kernels? - are they
> experimental, or something we should document? - maybe its a
> good time to nail down the semantics of what goes in [kernels]
> and [cross]; or maybe decide if those specialty repos are any
> longer needed
> the wiki is not very helpful for understanding their original
> intentions
>   [libre]
>   "contains non-standard kernels such as "long term support with
>   stealth TCP sockets patches" kernels oriented towards servers,
>   or kernels compiled with AppArmor, TOMOYO, SMACK and SELinux
>   support"
>   [cross]
>   "contains mostly-unsupported packages that contain tool-chains
>   for cross-compiling for a different architecture"
> IMHO we do not want any permanently "unsupported packages" - we
> have the personal name-spaces for experimentation; and there is
> another repo which is named: [unmaintained] - though again i
> think there should not be any unsupported nor unmaintained
> packages in the system - a "PUR" PKGBUILD repos would serve that
> purpose better
> we have discussed adding a something like a [build-tools] repo,
> for to hide 'pip' and other sharp kitchen utensils - maybe we
> could rename and re-purpose [cross] for that?
> _______________________________________________
> Dev mailing list
> Dev at lists.parabola.nu
> https://lists.parabola.nu/mailman/listinfo/dev

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.parabola.nu/pipermail/dev/attachments/20200523/e63883de/attachment.sig>

More information about the Dev mailing list