malta missed out from snapshot and release builds

[Felix Fietkau]

On 2017-02-26 12:11, Daniel Golle wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 05:55:02PM +0800, Yousong Zhou wrote:
>> On 26 February 2017 at 17:26, Matthias Schiffer
>> <mschiffer at universe-factory.net> wrote:
>> > On 02/26/2017 07:22 AM, Yousong Zhou wrote:
>> >> Timestamp of the last snapshot build is "Tue Jan 24 13:01:09 2017"
>> >> [1].  It's missing from all 17.01.0 release builds.
>> >>
>> >> Not sure how this happened, but we need to fix this.
>> >>
>> >>  [1] http://downloads.lede-project.org/snapshots/targets/malta/
>> >>
>> >> Regards,
>> >>                 yousong
>> >
>> > This is the effect of the source-only flag in target/linux/malta/Makefile,
>> > which deliberately excludes the target from buildbot builds. I think the
>> > reasoning was that the malta target is only useful for development and
>> > pre-built images just use up buildbot resources and mirror space.
>> >
>> > Matthias
>> >
>> 
>> I see now, thanks.
>> 
>> What do you guys think about bringing back the be and le subtarget?
>> They share the same arch as ramips and ar71xx and having such a target
>> readily available will be handy for testing, debugging, trying both
>> snapshot and release builds.
> 
> +1 malta binaries *are* useful in practise, I use them with
> ImageBuilder for debugging MIPS software with tools too large to fit
> into the actual target RAM. Having release binaries for malta is just
> as crucial as it is for armvirt, this can be used to verify that
> software package X behaves well on MIPS(el) in a *reproducible and
> (host-)platform agnostic* way.
> And they are also useful for KVM-enabled targets (such as mt7621).
> If anything is missing, I'd happily help out here.
Do we need both le and be? Isn't one of those two enough?

- Felix