6/9/2023 0 Comments Remove netatalk 3![]() The "mainline" netatalk 3.1.x development is basically bug fixes at this point. I just wish I was more embedded developer smart :( But in this case, I feel a little over my head at this point looking through this project.īut in any case, your efforts, are greatly appreciated. I know that where I work I could not get code to production that was that sparsely commented. But when I downloaded the project and started looking through it, many of the header files are not commented that well and I think it would take a lot of reading and studying to even get an idea of what is going on. The only experience that I have with anything remotely related to C would be three C++ classes that I took in my undergrad program but it has been a long time since I have dipped my toe into any language in the C family. If I had the time this would be a good jumping-off point for me to get into C more. But I do realize that a shift to 64bit is not trivial and would take some effort.Īs an aside. Once that is done I feel that the maintenance burden would be low enough so that a small group of hobbyist devs could keep this going. The one "feature" that I would love to be added from a "tech debt" perspective though is getting the project to build in a 64-bit kernel. But I fear that this is getting to the point that the "Vintage Mac/Apple Community" is going to have to take "ownership" of this project soon somehow to keep it working on more modern *nix systems (Apparently this project should be buildable on BSD as well) Github would be a popular choice but I am all for alternatives that are not add-heavy heck even if the version control system doesn't use git, I would be okay with it. I have nothing against SVN or CVS or the like but Sourceforge very add-heavy and that rubs me the wrong way. Also if the official Netatalk project maintainers have turned their back on the 2.x branch then I would be all for rehosting the project on another version control repository. But I would hate for you to be the only maintainer. I also keep my parents old LaserWriter 4/600 PS going through this package running on a PI 1B+ (original single-core CPU but 512MB RAM). ![]() ![]() That would be awesome and I really appreciate your willingness to do it. But I would love to help out in some way to make sure this project does not die. While I do code in my day job I do have to admit that I am not a network protocol engineer nor do I work in C. Is there any interest in keeping something like this working in the vintage mac community. I can see in its source forge page that it had its last commit in 2017 But beyond the date I can not see what changed in that commit. I know that the main netatalk project devs are not interested in reimplementing AppleTalk support into the 3.x branch of the project but I was wondering if anyone had any information on where the 2.x version branch stands as of now. I was wondering what could be done to make sure that this software does not "rot" away. This has set some alarm bells for me since this package has been very valuable to me lately. I am told that it can not be installed on the new Raspberry pi 4. I am starting to get the impression that the 2.x version branch is starting to suffer from neglect. However, as many know, the main netatalk project dropped support for AppleTalk DDP proper years ago in the version 3.x branch and it is only still found in the 2.x branch. Like many here, A2Server has been a godsend for me in being able to get an AppleTalk file server up and running on a Linux machine (in my case a raspberry pi) for my classic macs. I have been chatting with fellow vintage mac enthusiasts on a few Facebook groups and I really think that this merits some deeper discussion.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |