Received: from mx1.tetrasec.net (mx1.tetrasec.net [66.245.176.36]) by nld3-dev1.alpinelinux.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CAA12782B70 for <~alpine/devel@lists.alpinelinux.org>; Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:37:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mx1.tetrasec.net (mail.local [127.0.0.1]) by mx1.tetrasec.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1216186619; Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:37:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ncopa-desktop.copa.dup.pw (67.63.200.37.customer.cdi.no [37.200.63.67]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: alpine@tanael.org) by mx1.tetrasec.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id ED4AC86618; Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:37:22 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2020 16:37:18 +0200 From: Natanael Copa To: Ariadne Conill Cc: ~alpine/devel@lists.alpinelinux.org, =?ISO-8859-1?B?Kioq?= , wanglei@loongson.cn, duchuan@loongson.cn, houfangdong@loongson.cn, huangjiawen@loongson.cn, wanghonghu@loongson.cn, wanghuaiqing@loongson.cn, wangming@loongson.cn, yangtiezhu@loongson.cn, lizhi01@loongson.cn Subject: Re: alpine is not support mips64el platform on apk packages source Message-ID: <20200430163718.766e2b25@ncopa-desktop.copa.dup.pw> In-Reply-To: <1752566.52O7J0OIYB@localhost> References: <38d84564.ac70.171b57f740e.Coremail.liuxiaodong@loongson.cn> <1752566.52O7J0OIYB@localhost> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.5 (GTK+ 2.24.32; x86_64-alpine-linux-musl) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, 29 Apr 2020 21:55:03 -0600 Ariadne Conill wrote: > Hi, >=20 > On Sunday, April 26, 2020 1:59:21 AM MDT *** wrote: > > Hi Ariadne, > >=20 > > I have notified your requirements to our kernel team, but there are some > > issues as follows: * Can you accept patches that we have not submitted = to > > the Linux community yet? Or only accept patches from upstream? * We do = have > > difficulties to provide kernel version 4.9, alternative kernel version = 4.19 > > and 5.4 are OK? =20 >=20 > We would prefer patches for 5.4, and we can probably carry them in our li= nux- > lts package, but we should make sure that Natanael is okay with that as h= e=20 > leads kernel maintenance in Alpine. Otherwise, we can provide a patched= =20 > kernel as we do with linux-octeon. Depends a bit on how intrusive they are and how much they get in the way when upstream kernel is updated. I don't want spend hours of rebasing kernel patches on every kernel update. -nc