On Sat, Apr 25, 1998 at 11:03:10AM -0700, Guy Maor wrote: > Is that correct? I ask because dinstall currently installs packages > into hamm and slink by installing it into the former and symlinking it > to the later. This causes unnecessary mirror traffic for those archs > that will only be released with 2.1 because I must later move binary-* > for those to slink. Speaking for binary-powerpc there will not be 2.0. I hope we'll be ready for 2.1. I wonder if it would be useful to remove binary-powerpc from hamm completely and only work on slink. As far as I can see we only have disadvantages supporting hamm-powerpc. (no regular uploads, extra handling of security fixes to non-supported versions, frozen of _really unstable_ binary set etc.) Regards, Joey -- / Martin Schulze * joey@infodrom.north.de * 26129 Oldenburg / / No question is too silly to ask, / / but, of course, some are too silly to answer. -- perl book /
Attachment:
pgpOThn135Kug.pgp
Description: PGP signature