[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?
Description: This is a digitally signed message part