On Thu, 2014-12-18 at 20:08 +0000, Leif Lindholm wrote: > On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 06:35:25PM +0000, Ian Campbell wrote: > > > > Is PSTORE (going to be) a thing on arm64? (I'm not entirely sure what > > > > pstore is, so sorry if this is a silly question). > > > > > > I am actually not concerned about pstore itself, but rather by the > > > lack of similarity between platforms. > > > > Consistency is a worthwhile goal, but not at the expense of enabling > > legacy x86 junk on new architectures where it can never have any > > relevance. I don't know if pstore fits that bill, which is why I was > > asking about it. > > > > If pstore is going to be a useful thing on arm64 then of course we > > should enable it. We should *not* enable it purely to gain the side > > effect of loading efivars (the more so since as discussed below it seems > > like efivars itself is a legacy interface). > > pstore is not legacy nonsense (it's for storing system crash > information persistently). I don't actively care only since I've also > not heard anyone screaming for it.
Thanks, it does sound useful rather than legacy. Given what Ben said it does seem like it would be worthwhile to enable. > Ok, so I had a peek in codesearch.debian.net, to see what current > users we have. elilo can be ignored, dracut probably doesn't matter > (?), mdadm has it in platform-intel.c so still wouldn't matter, kernel > doesn't matter and grub2 will work anyway. > > Which leaves us with the risk of out-of-tree software making use of it. My inclination is towards suggesting that if people are running out-of-tree software which needs the efivars interface then they should arrange for it to be loaded themselves (e.g. by adding to /etc/modules). Ian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
