Re: [buildd] Etch?
On Mon, 14 Aug 2006, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > Are there some numbers about this?
> I'm not really part of the FTP team, so I can't speak out of authority
> here. However, last I heard, the numbers were something approximating
Thanks for this. Considering all this it rather sounds like nobody is
really willing to make some compromises and instead the bars are raised
so high to weed out the smaller/slower ports.
Using CF like this to match some otherwise impossible requirements would
be more like applying an infusion to a port, which has been declared dead
by others. If Debian is not willing or able to provide a home for m68k,
it's maybe time to move on and look for alternatives. I guess we could
debate this forever, my point is that this runs contrary to my interests
in this port, which is to keep it working as good as technically possible.
I can understand the sentiments and I know everyone puts a lot of work
into this, which I appreciate, but IMO it's the wrong solution to make the
compromises at this level.