Re: Future of m68k - Etch and beyond
- To: Stephen R Marenka <stephen@marenka.net>
- Cc: debian-68k@lists.debian.org
- Subject: Re: Future of m68k - Etch and beyond
- From: Roman Zippel <zippel@linux-m68k.org>
- Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2007 19:37:15 +0100 (CET)
- Message-id: <[🔎] Pine.LNX.4.64.0703031931080.787@scrub.home>
- In-reply-to: <20070226191210.GC8391@marenka.net>
- References: <20070223120315.GD11099@2004.bluespice.org> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0702232341030.30204@loopy.telegraphics.com.au> <20070223152928.GK1901@country.grep.be> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0702240901520.6280@loopy.telegraphics.com.au> <20070224141626.GB6497@country.grep.be> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0702251722510.787@scrub.home> <20070226122516.GA13618@country.grep.be> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0702261355150.14457@scrub.home> <20070226144725.GA5309@country.grep.be> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0702261855310.14457@scrub.home> <20070226191210.GC8391@marenka.net>
Hi,
On Mon, 26 Feb 2007, Stephen R Marenka wrote:
> To me it seems clear that compiling all of kde and gnome to run on traditional
> m68k hardware is a waste of time and cycles. However, how do we carve up
> the dependency tree so that we can support what we want without killing
> ourselves?
>From a tool chain point of view I actually like that a lot is compiled,
but of course they don't need to recompiled constantly, e.g. like a weekly
kdelibs release shortly before the freeze is of course overkill. OTOH the
current mixture of arch dependent and independent packages forces us to
recompile everything as quickly as possible to avoid uninstallable
packages and often the next day new packages appear which depend on the
very latest library versions...
bye, Roman
Reply to: