Clemens Koller <clemens.koller@anagramm.de> wrote:
Giorgio Lando schrieb:
Moreover:
* (perhaps) merge with CRUX-PPC
A little distribution should not try to work on multiple architectures, because this implies a massive dissipation of efforts: CRUX is designed to work on i686 machine and should not try to be something else
Sorry, that's total nonsense!
root@ecam:~$ crux CRUX version 2.3 root@ecam:~$ cat /proc/cpuinfo processor : 0 cpu : e500 revision : 2.0 (pvr 8020 0020) bogomips : 823.29 chipset : 8540 Vendor : Freescale Semiconductor Machine : mpc8540ads clock : 825MHz PVR : 0x80200020 SVR : 0x80300020 PLL setting : 0x5 Memory : 256 MB
The CRUX philosophy (stay simple and functional) is the key to be portable to other architectures.
Yes, I fully acknowledge. Writing a portable and functional programme is often also connected with portability, UNIX is a famous example of this design philosophy.
The funny thing is that from the current 102 ports in x86' core only 10 need special care to build for this (quite strange) embedded PowerPC. (I "forked" crux-embedded from crux-x86 and not from crux-ppc!)
This the result of portability and shows that porting CRUX is a (hopefully) trivial task. Thus we could merge quite quickly.
So, the official (x86-)CRUX is already over 90% architecture transparent!
I don't really care if it's merged with crux-x86 or crux-ppc... It's no big deal to handle the 10 packages (the toolchain plus some crap) when there are some updates. (once every other month)
Perhaps it is not difficult, but I think collaboration would be more successful and effective. -- Matthias-Christian Ott