On Mon, May 22, 2023 at 09:46:57AM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > On Mon, 22 May 2023 at 09:39, Greg Kroah-Hartman > <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Mon, May 22, 2023 at 09:08:35AM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > > > (cc Greg as stable maintainer) > > > > > > On Sat, 20 May 2023 at 21:23, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz > > > <glaubitz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > > I have been thinking about this discussion for a while now and my suggestion > > > > would be to drop ia64 support from the kernel, GRUB and gcc/binutils/glibc in > > > > this order: > > > > > > > > - Kernel: After the next LTS release > > > > - GRUB: After the 2.12 release > > > > - gcc/binutils/glibc: After support was dropped from the kernel > > > > > > > > This way anyone still using ia64 will be able to use it with a supported codebase > > > > for an extended time and upstream projects have target releases for which they > > > > can plan the removal. > > > > > > > > > > Yeah, I think this is reasonable. Having a clear agreement on where > > > the support ends helps both the remaining users and the developers > > > eager to move on. > > > > > > My only question is how we would land fixes for ia64 into this Linux > > > LTS release if there is no upstream any longer to draw from. > > > > > > Greg, could you comment on this? > > > > That would imply that people actually used that arch and code, so why > > would it have been removed from Linus's tree? > > > > As far as we have been able to establish, the only people that use > this arch and code are people that would hate to see it go, but don't > actually use it for anything other than checking whether it still > boots, and don't have the skills or bandwidth to step up and maintain > it upstream. Great, then let's drop it today, there is no need to wait until the end of the year as nothing is going to change then. thanks, greg k-h
|