Proposals of deprecation/removal, mainly affecting toolchain
Get series with b4
b4 am [email protected]Versions newest first
- v1 Latest1 of 10 patches 0 repliesNew
1 of 10 patches is in this archive. The cover letter announces 10.
Patches in v1 No applies recorded yet
| # | Subject and files | Size | Replies | Applied |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | busybox: support only one version | +0 | 0 replies |
Reviews trailers per patch
No Reviewed-by, Acked-by or Tested-by trailers for v1 yet.
Cover letter [Buildroot] [PATCH 00/10] Proposals of deprecation/removal, mainly affecting toolchain
Quoted 4 lines · Thomas Petazzoni
I've got some hardware here, so I could do some testing. On the Blackfin side, I continue to remain highly disappointed by the lack of help/support from ADI, despite the numerous requests I made to them, and the fact that they use Buildroot as their official build system.
This ^ i had in mind when writing about upstream help.
And them doing patches that just switch fork() with vfork() without any proper context, which will make things build but never work in a proper/how they were intended way.
Quoted 2 lines
Hopefully this is the type of issues that will get resolved with 4.9.1 or 4.9.2.
Yes, build breakage mostly so i'd expect the same.
Quoted 6 lines
I don't know. Which architectures are in this situation right now? AVR32 for sure. Blackfin is also an architecture for which we don't have a lot of contribution from either ADI or direct Blackfin users. Any other architecture? We can't expect for all architectures to have direct upstream collaboration, not all companies necessarily care about Buildroot.
Well going back to the first point, if they don't care and use it like ADI that's shortsightedness to me.
As always if they upstream their stuff then most of the time they don't need to care.
Regarding noMMU, blackfin may indirectly benefit from ARM Cortex-M if it picks up pace - i.e. more people working at solving issues with it. Regards.