Re: gcc 4.5 and TLS
On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 12:05:39PM +0200, Ingo Jürgensmann wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 11:43:29AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>
> > Or have we collectively lost interest and should we just let it die?
>
> Well, motivation is somewhat lower after not being an official part of
> Debian anymore, but I still like m68k and would keep my machines running.
I could revive some hosts, too, though it would involve some work.
But the point is not machines; if they are set up, in general they will
keep running (module age issues). The point is how much time we're
willing to put in. I'm still interested in getting this hybrid ColdFire
thing working, but not if I end up being the only one to work on it
again. I'd also need to get a fairly up-to-date environment to work on
my coldfire board.
> So, when there's a chance to have an up-to-date archive, I would welcome it.
> Though, we should consider to not build everything just for the sake of
> being able to do so.
We should be careful in how we prioritize packages. We should not let
buildd hosts sit idle if there are things they might be able to build.
Also, adding more computing power is, in general, just a scalability
issue. Adding more manpower is something else.
--
The biometric identification system at the gates of the CIA headquarters
works because there's a guard with a large gun making sure no one is
trying to fool the system.
http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2009/01/biometrics.html
Reply to: