Re: Why did main's [so: 15's] new aarch64 snapshots have PINE64 (not -LTS) instead of RPI? (has -LTS too)

Reply: Mark Millard : "Re: Why did main's [so: 15's] new aarch64 snapshots have PINE64 (not -LTS) instead of RPI? (has -LTS too)"
Reply: Emmanuel Vadot : "Re: Why did main's [so: 15's] new aarch64 snapshots have PINE64 (not -LTS) instead of RPI? (has -LTS too)"
In reply to: Mark Millard : "Why did main's [so: 15's] new aarch64 snapshots have PINE64 (not -LTS) instead of RPI? (has -LTS too)"
Go to: [ bottom of page ] [ top of archives ] [ this month ]

From: Glen Barber <gjb_at_freebsd.org>
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2023 18:28:22 UTC

On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 10:35:39PM -0700, Mark Millard wrote:
> https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-snapshots/2023-October/000308.html
> [New FreeBSD snapshots available: main (20231019 fb7140b1f928)]
> 
> reported (note "RPI"):
> 
> o 15.0-CURRENT aarch64 GENERIC
> o 15.0-CURRENT aarch64 RPI
> o 15.0-CURRENT aarch64 PINE64-LTS
> o 15.0-CURRENT aarch64 PINEBOOK
> o 15.0-CURRENT aarch64 ROCK64
> o 15.0-CURRENT aarch64 ROCKPRO64
> o 15.0-CURRENT riscv64 GENERIC
> o 15.0-CURRENT riscv64 GENERICSD
> 
> https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-snapshots/2023-October/000310.html
> [New FreeBSD snapshots available: main (20231026 d3a36e4b7459) ]
> 
> reported (note "PINE64" without "-LTS" and lack of "RPI"):
> 
> o 15.0-CURRENT aarch64 GENERIC
> o 15.0-CURRENT aarch64 PINE64
> o 15.0-CURRENT aarch64 PINE64-LTS
> o 15.0-CURRENT aarch64 PINEBOOK
> o 15.0-CURRENT aarch64 ROCK64
> o 15.0-CURRENT aarch64 ROCKPRO64
> o 15.0-CURRENT riscv64 GENERIC
> o 15.0-CURRENT riscv64 GENERICSD
> 
> 

Last week, RPI succeeded while PINE64 failed.  This week, the opposite
occurred.

Glen