On 29 May 2023, at 17:11, Aurelien Jarno <aure...@debian.org> wrote: > > Dear GNU/kFreeBSD porters, > > Over the past year, GNU/kFreeBSD hasn't seen any significant > development. After reaching out to various individuals involved, it > seems unlikely that the situation will change in the foreseeable future. > Here are some statistics that support this observation: > > - The last buildd upload for kfreebsd-amd64 and kfreebsd-i386 was over a > year ago. > - There have been no porter uploads for kfreebsd-i386 in the past year. > - In the last year, only 11 porter uploads for kfreebsd-amd64 have been > recorded, with the most recent one occurring over two months ago. > - Only approximately 30% of the packages on these architectures are > up-to-date. > > With my ports-master hat, I think it is time to consider the removal of > both the kfreebsd-amd64 and kfreebsd-i386 architectures from the > debian-ports archive. I would like to emphasize that packages will still > be available on snapshot.d.o for anyone interested in reviving the port. > > In any case, I am waiting for feedback, and I will wait for at least a > month before taking any action.
Hi Aurelien, As discussed on IRC, and as the most recent primary porter, it’s time to finally let it die. GNU/kFreeBSD was an interesting experiment but things like the lack of upstreamed glibc patches made it a lot of work to keep up-to-date, and even a few years ago when I was able to actively maintain the port it was still suffering from an outdated glibc and requiring ugly workarounds as a result. It tried to be the best of both worlds, but these days at least anyone would be better served with one of the other. Thanks to all those who maintained it before me, and those that helped whilst I was doing so, whether providing patches or machines. Regards, Jess
