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

Re: amd64 and sarge

* Raul Miller (moth@debian.org) wrote:
> 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.

The vast majority of packages in Debian have *already* been ported.
That's what pure64 *is*.  The number of people 'upgrading' from 32bit
systems is probably around 1 (that being you), the rest of us have moved
on to pure64 already, and did so a long ass time ago.

> 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".

This is just blatently false.  There certainly is gain in making every
package supported on both architectures.  It gives our users *options*.
For the amd64 side, it allows programs (*all* of them) to use more than 
2G of memory if they have a need to, it makes *most* of them run faster 
and more effeciently.  We need the i386 stuff anyway since there are
i386-only systems out there today.  Perhaps some day we will be able to
remove i386, but I don't expect that to happen anytime soon.

> And, frankly, the current pure64 port already includes most of what
> biarch needs.

The current pure64 port has gone far beyond the half-ass biarch you're 
referring to.  Unfortunately, you can't manage to see that.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: