From: S V Subject: Re: where to start with new arch To: Janne Johansson Cc: tech Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2024 18:03:04 +0300 сб, 31 авг. 2024 г., 14:30 Janne Johansson : > Den sön 25 aug. 2024 kl 16:07 skrev S V : > > Hello! > > I'm curious there to start with new arch. > > I got access to rare architecture with installed linux (sources for > kernel with support for it is open sourced) and proprietary c/c++ compiler > (gcc-compatible mostly) (no sources for it) > > Any suggestions on there to start? Anybody interested in more info/dive? > > I think there could be several reasons why you did not get an answer, > so I will guess what those reasons might be: > > 1. The question was very vague, as if the platform/arch was a secret > or something. If the receiver doesn't even know what we are talking > about, it might be hard to gather interest for it. Also, openbsd is > mostly not interested in 32bit arches, so anything not 64-bit is > probably not going to gather much interest right off the bat, and most > things that do support 64bit are already present. > Yeah, I understand this, it wasnt secret, but I'm asking it more for myself cause arch is very rare and probably will never be accepted upstream by reasons of closedness and random retail shop unavailability. My vague question was more with goal to get generic way of porting to new arches ( that also will be useful to next curious people with another arches! ) (Arch is so called e2k, russian VLIW, that recently become at least partially opensource in terms of linux kernel. Also I plan to get loongson board for experiments too.) 2. The non-existence of a free compiler is also a huge show-stopper. > Who would pay for compilers to produce such a platform? Not obsd devs > at least. Even in the super unlikely event that someone (you?) would > turn this compiler into free software overnight, adding yet another > compiler into src/ would be a hurdle as well. > I was planning to play with it myself as sort of pet. (at least I dont build grand plans) 3. Given that we don't even know what machines we are talking about > here, we can only guess that it is some rare kind of machine, which in > turn could prevent it from easily becoming a supported OpenBSD > platform, this requires boxes to be available for builds of -stable > releases, -current and N+1 machines for ports building. > Sure, I understand all this.