Re: amd64 and sarge
> > Bi-arch being less painful than multiarch, in my
> > opinion -- it needs to touch far fewer packages:
> > http://lists.debian.org/debian-amd64/2004/07/msg00244.html
On Thu, Jul 29, 2004 at 11:43:00AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> This is only true if you do a half-ass[1] job w/ bi-arch. This isn't,
> and never has been, the intent of the amd64 porters. Multiarch is
> coming and will take quite a while to do but we will be much better off
> for it. We will also give our users the ability to use their systems to
> their fullest potential- not just as a platform upon which to run
> binary-only commercial apps.
I dispute your half-ass assertion.
biarch is useful for systems in transition. That means people upgrading
from 32 bit systems, and people working with packages which haven't been
ported -- for whatever reason.
There's little to no gain in making every package biarch. So there's
no point in calling a plan to not do so "half-ass".
And, frankly, the current pure64 port already includes most of what
biarch needs.
--
Raul
Reply to: