Re: multiarch/bi-arch status (ETA) question
David Wood <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> On Wed, 6 Jul 2005, Hugo Mills wrote:
>> They're not (directly) the way that the Debian multiarch is most
>> likely to go. Unfortunately, the relevant site seems to be down, but
>> take a look at , and possibly some of the other (Google cached)
>> files in .
> Just out of curiosity; does anyone know what was wrong with the
> way documented in:
Afaik that is completly based on and in sync with our multiarch
proposal and exactly what we want to achive.