On 2022-04-14, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
> On 2022-04-14, phodina@protonmail.com wrote:
> (e.g. drop drop u-boot-rpi-0-w*, u-boot-rpi, u-boot-rpi-efi, maybe
> consider droping u-boot-rpi-2* and the 32-bit variants for rpi3 and
> rpi4, as armhf is not well maintained at the moment).
>
> Basically, ARMv6 is not supportable by guix, ARMv7 is poorly supported
> in the armhf architecture, and ARMv8 is capable of running aarch64
> (a.k.a. arm64):
>
>   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raspberry_Pi#Specifications
>
>
> Only proposing aarch64 variants would pretty much leave you with
> rpi-arm64.

Just tested this on an rpi3b+ and sometime between u-boot 2021.01 and
2021.04 rpi-arm64 fails to boot on rpi3b+ ... but does work with the
rpi_3 and rpi_3_b_plus defconfigs... so I guess that makes a case for
having multiple variants, even if rpi_arm64 theoretically supports all
the arm64 boards... hrm.

That said, now that I've been able to test it; I feel confident at least
adding a simple u-boot-rpi-3 and/or u-boot-rpi-3-b-plus package (without
most of the proposed changes). Even though I haven't been able to test
u-boot-rpi-arm64, might be worth adding just to get it out of the way.


I could also test booting the rpi2 variants, though as mentioned
earlier, I'm skeptical about adding more support until things improve
for armhf on guix.


live well,
  vagrant