[I am not subscribed to debian-amd64, please Cc: me if you feel your
reply deserves my attention.]
Hi all, you'll mostly be pleased to know that dpkg in unstable now
supports your architecture; hopefully this is the first step towards
consideration for archive addition.
The archive name that has been chosen is "x86-64", which I understand
might upset a few people who like the other name.
As I've been at DebConf 4, it provided the ideal place to discuss the
architecture name in person with many people from the different Debian
teams including some of your own porters.
The advantages of this name are:
* it matches the GNU arch string
* it matches the name chosen by RedHat, Fedora and SuSE
* it doesn't include unnecessary marketing connotations, and avoids
the issue whether we even *can* use AMD's name in vain
The disadvantages are:
* it isn't what you have been using to-date
* it doesn't *quite* match the others "x86-64" vs. "x86_64"
The first issue is simply a matter of rebuilding, which shouldn't take
too long relatively. Your patches and fixes will still all work,
hopefully.
The second is due to "_" being used as a filename separator; I'd like to
investigate what actually *relies* on this and potentially change the
architecture at a later date (still before archive addition) to x86_64
to totally match the others -- we'll see how that plays out.
Scott
--
Have you ever, ever felt like this?
Had strange things happen? Are you going round the twist?
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part