Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 0/6] generic way to deprecate machines

[Philippe Mathieu-Daudé]

Hi Thomas,

On 05/04/2018 02:15 PM, Thomas Huth wrote:
> On 08.11.2017 03:28, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
>>
>> This series intends to provide a simple and common way to deprecate
>> machines between releases. It may be extended to deprecate devices.
> 
> *ping*
> 
> Philippe, I just discovered your findings wrt to the Gumstix machines on
> https://wiki.qemu.org/Features/LegacyRemoval#Deprecated_machines ...
> sounds reasonable, so I think we should really continue here and mark
> those as deprecated. And pc-0.10 and pc-0.11, too.

Ironically I have been using the Gumstix machines quite a lot for the SD
'subsystem' refactor, using the MMC commands in U-Boot (I am unable to
reach the Linux userland since the kernel crashes), and plan to add SD
integration tests via Avocado.

This raises:

- What will happens if I add tests downloading running on their compiled
u-boot
(https://downloads.gumstix.com/images/angstrom/developer/2012-01-22-1750/u-boot.bin)
and the company decides to remove this old directory?
Since sometimes old open-source software are hard to rebuild with recent
compilers, should we consider to use a public storage to keep
open-source (signed) blobs we can use for integration testing?

Avocado has a 'vmimage library' which could be extended, adding support
for binary url + detached gpg signatures from some QEMU maintainers?

(I am also using old Gentoo/Debian packaged HPPA/Alpha Linux kernel for
Avocado SuperIO tests, which aren't guaranteed to stay downloadable
forever).

- Maybe I have to volunteer to update the Gumstix section from Orphan
'Odd Fixes' to keep those tests.

> Do you have some spare time to respin your patch series?

I'll make some.

Regards,

Phil.

> 
>  Thomas
>

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature