On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 02:52:25PM +0100, Ingo Juergensmann wrote: > On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 07:27:07AM -0600, Stephen R Marenka wrote: > > > Meanwhile, maybe we need to think about what a debian-m68k distribution > > should really have in it. We could probably release a lenny-m68k without > > kde, gnome, mathematical packages, and some of the other large packages > > that afaik, nobody uses on m68k. > > Definitely, such packages like blast2, axiom or scilab doesn't make much > sense on m68k except for academically proving that it can be run on m68k, > imho. > Similar packages are flight simulators and other high cpu and graphic load > based apps. I really doubt that anyone will ever use fs on linux m68k. > > Maybe we should concentrate on basic functionality including X11 support > with xfce4 or icewm, some sort of browser (dillo and iceweasel) and email > apps. > > > Would ya'll (such users and developers that hang around this list) support > > that? > > I do! > I think we can take care for about 4000 source packages, but ~7000 packages > is was too much, especially when some of the porters are always trying to > bring coldfire support in... Actually, we generally stay caught up until a major bug or toolset change causes us grief. Getting caught back up again takes us a very long time. It might be that we just need a very much smarter buildd queue with the things we don't care about sitting on the back burner until everything else is built. > Maybe we should start a new thread and announce it prominently on planet.d.o > and debian-devel@l.d.o and collect opinions for about 2 weeks and then take > action accordingly. I'd rather figure out *how* before I'm overly concerned with what and announcing it to the world. :) -- Stephen R. Marenka If life's not fun, you're not doing it right! <stephen@marenka.net>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature