[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: State of ARM port
From: |
Leif Lindholm |
Subject: |
Re: State of ARM port |
Date: |
Mon, 7 Dec 2015 19:03:03 +0000 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) |
On Mon, Dec 07, 2015 at 08:22:59PM +0300, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
> >> 1. upstream U-Boot prefers extlinux for loading, CONFIG_API is
> >> considered edge case, deprecated. They do not consider GRUB valid reason
> >> to maintain it :)
> >
> > Do you have any references to this?
> > (Not questioning it, sounds likely, but would like to read through
> > any existing discussions.)
>
> https://www.marc.info/?l=u-boot&m=140881607132099&w=2
> http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2015-October/229915.html (full thread)
It stops at Rafal pointing out it's needed for FreeBSD though.
But certainly there seems to be an ideological clash here.
> https://github.com/openSUSE/perl-bootloader/pull/81#issuecomment-158543744
Hmm. They haven't reported any issues here, or to the Linaro cross-distro
mailing list.
> >> 3 depends on motivation to debug and fix issues; as long as GRUB is not
> >> considered there is none.
> >>
> >> So what should we do with this port?
> >
> > Unsure.
> >
> > I have had people start asking me for the arm64 variant, but if the
>
> arm64 EFI grub port is used as standard in openSUSE. Only U-Boot
> platforms are moving away.
>
> Or do you mean arm64 U-Boot?
Yeah, sorry, I meant arm64 U-Boot.
/
Leif