On 19 April 2014 16:55, Alan Perry <alanp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > So the question to you guys... > > Shall we keep support for sun4d and sun4m? > > If yes then why? > > I collect Sun lunchbox systems and also have an Axil SS20 clone. I start up the lunchbox systems once a year to make sure they haven't died and regularly run the Axil. One of the lunchbox systems is running some Linux distro that I don't recall (it could be something old on a sun4c). > > Number one problem keeping them running long term is the NVRAM battery (I have added external batteries to the chips in almost all of them). Replacement SCSI HDDs are now a problem to source locally; I couldn't get any from the computer recycler last year. I can still get them on eBay. > > alan > Hi, I do not see why support for sun4m and sun4d should actively be dropped. I have contributed to the sparc32/sun4d port because I still have such a system that is in working order. (Along with several other sparc32/sparc64-variants) I have struggled with running Linux on architectures that are not supported by the mainline Linux kernel any more. And backporting features/bugfixes from never kernels becomes quite hard after a while. Is there currently some technical difficulties that prevents us for keeping the status quo? Or is this just a suggestion for the sake of suggestions ? Regards, Kjetil Oftedal (Resend to the mailinglist: html was inserted into the email by the webmail) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe sparclinux" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
