Differences between revisions 10 and 11
Revision 10 as of 2014-04-02 12:26:19
Size: 3722
Comment:
Revision 11 as of 2014-04-08 22:54:30
Size: 3952
Comment: A few general updates.
Deletions are marked like this. Additions are marked like this.
Line 10: Line 10:
 Not yet. The machines used during the initial bootstrap are pre-GA (General Availability). Meanwhile we are going to make a porter box available to the Debian project.  Not yet. The machines used for development/bootstrap are pre-GA (General Availability). Meanwhile, we are going to make a porter box available to the Debian project.
Line 14: Line 14:
 Yes. The full stack is (or should be) open source.
 * Kernel is already upstream
 * Toolchain (gcc, glibc and gdb) is already upstream
 Yes. The full stack is open source.
 * Kernel support is already upstream
 * Toolchain (GCC, glibc, gdb, binutils) support is already upstream
Line 20: Line 20:
 Yes. It's related to ppc64 and powerpc, but with a newer ABI (ABI v2) which now runs in little endian mode.
 Once the kernel doesn't support bi-endianess, multi-arch is not feasible with ppc64 and powerpc ports.
 Yes; it's related to the ppc64 and powerpc ports, but with a different/newer ABI (ELFv2), and running in little endian mode.

 A multi-arch arrangement with the other ports is not feasible, si
nce the kernel doesn't support bi-endianness.
Line 36: Line 37:
 Servers, running inside a virtual machine initially.  Servers. Initially, the port runs in qemu/kvm guests.
Line 40: Line 41:
 At this moment, only developers are expected to be using this port. In the future, everyone is going to be able to use it.  Yes, there are users -- at this moment, only developers from IBM and its business partners are able to use this port due to hardware availability (exception: the porter box). In the future (i.e., after hardware general availability) anyone may be able to use it.
Line 43: Line 44:
=== Is there kernel and toolchain support? At what level? Are the latest versions supported, or are legacy releases required for compatability with some hardware? === === Is there kernel and toolchain support? At what level? Are the latest versions supported, or are legacy releases required for compatibility with some hardware? ===
Line 45: Line 46:
 Yes. Linux kernel starting at 3.13 has the initial support for this architecture. For toolchain, gcc-4.8 also has support for this architecture. Glibc 2.18 also has the support for it.  Yes. The architecture support started with these versions, which are recent:
 * Linux kernel: 3.13
 * GCC: 4.8
 * glibc: 2.18
 * binutils: 2.24
Line 50: Line 55:
 Yes. The ABI is complete and stable, and could be found at the ppc64el home page https://wiki.debian.org/ppc64el  Yes. The ABI is stable, and supported with the GNU toolchain (binutils, glibc, GCC).
Line 52: Line 57:
 The ABI document is available at https://wiki.debian.org/ppc64el.
Line 55: Line 61:
The only way to install it at the moment is using debootstrap from another architecture. Check it at: Currently, running debootstrap from another port/architecture and running debootstrap second-stage from the port.
Line 62: Line 68:
 Yes. Around 6k  architecture-dependent source packages were built and is already in a off-the-tree place.  Yes. Around 6k architecture-dependent source packages were built, and are available for download.
Line 68: Line 74:
 Most of these machines are pretty big, so, they are able to build packages very fast.  The servers on which this port runs -- they are sufficiently fast for building packages.
Line 72: Line 78:
 No at the moment. A process to create a porter box is in place.  Not at the moment. A process to create a porter box is in place.
Line 76: Line 82:
     Initially, the port runs in qemu/kvm guests.

ppc64el: archive qualification page

Contents

  1. ppc64el: archive qualification page
    1. Questions for new architectures
      1. Are machines available to buy for the general public?
      2. Is full source available?
      3. Is this architecture related to other architectures already in the archive, or that also should be considered, either now or in the future? Can the related architectures be supported in a single architecture (eg, with a biarch arrangement)?
      4. Are there 3 or more developers (or NMs) actively maintaining the port? Who are they?
      5. What sort of architecture is this? Desktop/workstation? Mainframe/supercomputer? Embedded? Something else?
      6. Does it have any users? If a desktop system, are there Debian admins who run Debian systems on the arch? If an embedded system are there real systems shipping that a Debian port will be useful for? If a mainframe system are there real systems with many users that a Debian port will be useful for? Who are they?
      7. Is there kernel and toolchain support? At what level? Are the latest versions supported, or are legacy releases required for compatibility with some hardware?
      8. Has the ABI stabilised, or are there major ABI changes coming up? Is the ABI stable enough to ensure users will be able just "apt-get dist-upgrade" from one version to the next?
      9. How do you install a system? (URL to a HOWTO)
      10. Has a buildd been setup? How much of the archive has been built (count by source package, builds of old versions are fine for this case)?
      11. What hardware is potentially available as a fast buildd?
      12. Is there an example box developers can login to to see if it works?
      13. It's also worth considering whether the port has any special requirements. If the port is mainly for embedded systems, it may be appropriate to have different installation or release arrangements compared to normal desktop/workstation architectures.

Questions for new architectures

Are machines available to buy for the general public?

  • Not yet. The machines used for development/bootstrap are pre-GA (General Availability). Meanwhile, we are going to make a porter box available to the Debian project.

Is full source available?

  • Yes. The full stack is open source.
  • Kernel support is already upstream
  • Toolchain (GCC, glibc, gdb, binutils) support is already upstream

  • Yes; it's related to the ppc64 and powerpc ports, but with a different/newer ABI (ELFv2), and running in little endian mode. A multi-arch arrangement with the other ports is not feasible, since the kernel doesn't support bi-endianness.

Are there 3 or more developers (or NMs) actively maintaining the port? Who are they?

What sort of architecture is this? Desktop/workstation? Mainframe/supercomputer? Embedded? Something else?

  • Servers. Initially, the port runs in qemu/kvm guests.

Does it have any users? If a desktop system, are there Debian admins who run Debian systems on the arch? If an embedded system are there real systems shipping that a Debian port will be useful for? If a mainframe system are there real systems with many users that a Debian port will be useful for? Who are they?

  • Yes, there are users -- at this moment, only developers from IBM and its business partners are able to use this port due to hardware availability (exception: the porter box). In the future (i.e., after hardware general availability) anyone may be able to use it.

Is there kernel and toolchain support? At what level? Are the latest versions supported, or are legacy releases required for compatibility with some hardware?

  • Yes. The architecture support started with these versions, which are recent:
  • Linux kernel: 3.13
  • GCC: 4.8
  • glibc: 2.18
  • binutils: 2.24

Has the ABI stabilised, or are there major ABI changes coming up? Is the ABI stable enough to ensure users will be able just "apt-get dist-upgrade" from one version to the next?

How do you install a system? (URL to a HOWTO)

Currently, running debootstrap from another port/architecture and running debootstrap second-stage from the port.

https://wiki.debian.org/ppc64el

Has a buildd been setup? How much of the archive has been built (count by source package, builds of old versions are fine for this case)?

What hardware is potentially available as a fast buildd?

  • The servers on which this port runs -- they are sufficiently fast for building packages.

Is there an example box developers can login to to see if it works?

  • Not at the moment. A process to create a porter box is in place.

It's also worth considering whether the port has any special requirements. If the port is mainly for embedded systems, it may be appropriate to have different installation or release arrangements compared to normal desktop/workstation architectures.

  • Initially, the port runs in qemu/kvm guests.