Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.5\))
Subject: Re: Can we drop armhf (armv6) after v3.12?
From: spam@ipik.org
In-Reply-To: <B10D4884-BC26-4ADE-8FBB-0AEF787E1831@ipik.org>
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2020 11:51:20 +0200
Cc: Alpine develmopment <~alpine/devel@lists.alpinelinux.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <39849A61-BF46-4A4A-A03A-EB004109153C@ipik.org>
References: <20200528104748.4d37ede5@ncopa-desktop.copa.dup.pw>
 <B10D4884-BC26-4ADE-8FBB-0AEF787E1831@ipik.org>
To: Natanael Copa <ncopa@alpinelinux.org>

Dear Natanael,

Have you come to a definitive conclusion on this particular matter?
Thank you for consideration and feedback.

Regards.
macmpi.

> On 28 May 2020, at 11:19, spam@ipik.org wrote:
>=20
> Dear Natanael,
>=20
> While I understand supporting many platforms has a burden,
> this proposal is a bit of concern as:
>=20
> - PiZeroW obsolescence is not planned until Jan 2026 at earliest
> https://www.raspberrypi.org/products/raspberry-pi-zero-w/
> We can expect Pi foundation & quite wide community will then
> stay behind it, and provide patches, for most critical components.
>=20
> - PiZero is officially supported in upstream kernel, and we=E2=80=99ve =
not
> seen any obsolescence notification yet (or I missed it)
>=20
> - Alpine is a platform of choice for low-ressorce devices, and PiZero
> is a perfect illustration of such target.
>=20
> - While I do not have shipment volume info, it is expected that it
> is a pretty big chunk of such tiny SBC category
>=20
>=20
> Would a path with limited support for some demanding UI framework
> make it easier to consider?
> Many server usecase may not require such UI frameworks.
>=20
> I hope Alpine will keep armhf for few major releases.
> Many thanks for consideration.
>=20
>=20
>> On 28 May 2020, at 10:47, Natanael Copa <ncopa@alpinelinux.org> =
wrote:
>>=20
>> Hi!
>>=20
>> Can we drop the armhf architecture after 3.12 release?
>>=20
>> It means that we will continue support armfh with 3.12 for two mor
>> years, but edge and next release 3.13 will be without armhf.
>>=20
>> This means that we effectively drop support for Raspberry pi 1 and
>> raspberry pi zero which are armv6. This is also the hardware we have
>> kernel for.
>>=20
>> The reason is that there are increasing number of issues that are not
>> fixed upstream. For example:
>> https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-65246
>>=20
>> We will also need to rebuild all our 32 bit architectures from =
scratch
>> when upgrading to musl 1.2 due to time64. It requires significant
>> effort to do that and it would be nice to only need to do it for x86
>> and armv7, and drop armhf.
>>=20
>> Are there any good reasons to why we should keep armhf?
>>=20
>> Are there other reasons to why we should drop it?
>>=20
>>=20
>> -nc
>>=20
>> PS. This was previously been discussed for 3.10 release:
>> =
https://lists.alpinelinux.org/~alpine/devel/%3C20190404112525.4b04fdeb%40n=
copa-desktop.copa.dup.pw%3E#%3CCAGP1gyPCsaHh+85g0QX-Cu40K-5Vd7xqLTV2aGiUgU=
r+RdrdFQ@mail.gmail.com%3E
>=20