[uClibc] Porting to a new arch (New FPU)

Kenneth Crudup kenny at panix.com
Thu May 26 19:27:53 UTC 2005


On Thu, 26 May 2005, Erik Andersen wrote:

> We (the developers of uClibc) reserve the right to break the SVN
> tree whenever we deem it necessary to the advancement of uClibc.

OK, I get *this* part, but all last week (and I've been using
uClibc for a couple of years now) I was building toolchains and
rootfs-es and had to get it off SVN, and this was for a production
environment. If the schedule would have had me do that *this* week,
(and IIRC, the buildscripts say "get the daily snapshot" as a default)
I'd've spent quite a bit of time wasted.

> We discussed the change in advance and I gave it my blessing as a
> change that is in fact necessary for all architectures.

OK, then that part is my fault for not seeing it. I'm sure that once
things had broken, I'd be in the archives first (which is why I don't
make many appearances here: "Google twice, ask once"), but it would
have put things off a bit.

Is there any reason why "not quite there yet" sweeping changes like this
can't go into a pre-release tree, so the "daily snapshot" default won't
get uncomplete builds like that?

> Unless you are paying someone to support and maintain uClibc for you,

That guy is me, actually, for someone else.

Ya know what? I've sent Manuel an E-mail from his last plea for money
saying that I would not only be willing to throw him a few personal
bucks, but I don't think it would be unreasonable (if it fact, not
required?) for my client to do the same when/if this thing goes to
production. I haven't heard back, but I assume that was 'cause he's busy.

	-Kenny

-- 
Kenneth R. Crudup  Sr. SW Engineer, Scott County Consulting, Los Angeles
H: 3630 S. Sepulveda Blvd. #138, L.A., CA 90034-6809      (888) 454-8181



More information about the uClibc mailing list