[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]


With #408780 filed I suppose I should bring this up here. The armel
architecture is regular arm, but it's a new ABI that is incompatable
with current arm binaries. The arm porters decided a whole new
architecture is the only sane way to go as a mixture of old and new ABI
debs claiming the same architecture would be deadly. See
http://wiki.debian.org/ArmEabiPort for details.

Changes in d-i for this will mostly be limited to adding "armel" after
"arm" in the architecture lists. I think that such changes, and other
trivial uses of the armel name could be committed now as they're found.
Anyone against that?

see shy jo

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: