Re: Suggestion: Skip Slink!
On Mon, Jan 04, 1999 at 09:54:13AM +0100, Christian Meder wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 03, 1999 at 11:17:47PM -0500, Avery Pennarun wrote:
> >
> > So screw those archs and don't release them for slink.
> >
> [Written under the constraints of a superhuman effort to remain calm and
> reasonable]
>
> Nice to hear that the effort of the Sparc porters is appreciated _that_
> much.
Sorry, I shouldn't have said it that way.
> Let me just inject some facts:
>
> * every architecture which is supposed to be frozen _is_ frozen except
> sparc
>
> * the sparc port isn't frozen because the ftpmasters didn't get around to
> do it yet. It's _not_ a problem of the sparc port per se.
What I should have said was: it's nice to have a sparc port, but sparc isn't
important enough to hold up the i386 release and especially not important
enough to cancel i386 slink. It simply wouldn't make sense.
For the record, I do appreciate the sparc port -- I ran it on my workstation
at my last job.
Have fun,
Avery
Reply to: