Sparc64 doesn't care about you, and you shouldn't care about Sparc64

Jukka Ukkonen jau789 at
Wed Nov 11 16:32:45 UTC 2015

> I'm all for keeping an architecture like sparc around, as long as
> there's active development and active users. MIPS has both. ARM has
> both. Powerpc has both. Sparc is missing some active developers, but
> it has plenty of FreeBSD users that speak up (and more users that only
> speak up privately.) So, if you want to see sparc64 support continue,
> this requires a grass roots effort to get more development happening -
> either users need to step up, or someone has to start contributing
> money.

Right, I am one of those who until now have only said something privately.
So, I think it is time for me to say this on a bit more public forum.
I could test something for sparc64 when I have a suitable moment.
I have an idle V240 which I intended to be a compatibility test system
anyhow. I cannot promise to do much of active development, though.
Obviously some compatibility patches now and then is not going to be
a problem. This being a hobby only for me and my real daily life being
elsewhere, most of the heavy lifting would have to be done by others.
I like the idea, though, that the sparc64 MMU keeps one on tip-toe
with the memory alignment. In fact I see that as the biggest benefit in
saving freebsd/sparc64. Additionally there is the admittedly very small
possibility that Oracle might change its mind about how to position
the hardware on the market, if several open OS environments keep
the architecture supported to some level.
So, if you accept little occasional help with testing and patching,
I'm in.


More information about the freebsd-sparc64 mailing list