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

Re: 185 Packages that look orphaned

On Mon, Jan 26, 2004 at 08:38:59PM -0800, Nano Nano wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 27, 2004 at 04:24:23AM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> > Anand Kumria <wildfire@progsoc.org> writes:
> > > No, if you going to send out this kind of email you need to look more
> > > deeply at the problem. swh-plugins requires fftw to work. That doesn't
> > > because GCC 3.3.3 ICEs on m68k. The fix is in gcc 3.3.4 but you, no
> > > doubt, already did the work to discover this rather than wasting my
> > > time.
> How much faster could Debian releases occur if fewer archs. were 
> supported?  

Until we have a d-i that works well on at least i386 and powerpc, the
answer is "negligibly". (Probably after then too, IME)


Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.

             Linux.conf.au 2004 -- Because we could.
           http://conf.linux.org.au/ -- Jan 12-17, 2004

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: