Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting
On Friday 18 March 2005 07:27, Karsten Merker wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2005 at 12:06:08PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > m68k, mips, mipsel, hppa: I've got one in the basement, and I like
> > to brag that I run Debian on it; also I occassionally get some work out
> > of it, but it'd be trivial to replace with i386.
> >
> > sparc, alpha: We've bought some of these a while ago, they're useful
> > running Debian, we'd really rather not have to stress with switching to
> > i386, but whatever.
> >
> > "why not just replace this with i386/amd64 hardware [...]
>
> If you argue in this style, let's remove all architectures (including
> *i386*) except for amd64 from Debian - after all, that is our most
> "modern" architecture and nobody hinders you of throwing out all
> your existing i386 hardware and buy a bunch of new shiny amd64
> systems instead.
Except that i386 support is almost gratis as most developers and most upstream
and everyone else uses it.
To answer Anthonys question:
My main customer uses two old sparc boxes as nameserver and backup-host. Since
they cannot execute i386 shell-code they are already hardend against many
automated script-kiddy attacks and the hardware is rock solid. Security
support obviously is obviously essential. If sparc is not able to reach
REGULAR status we will have to replace them with REGULAR hardware.
I talked with the CTO two days ago about the Vancouver plan and he said that
implementing it (or something similar) would demonstrate Debians ability to
cope with its internal problems, assuring him that he won't need to switch.
Regards, David
--
- hallo... wie gehts heute?
- *hust* gut *rotz* *keuch*
- gott sei dank kommunizieren wir über ein septisches medium ;)
-- Matthias Leeb, Uni f. angewandte Kunst, 2005-02-15
Reply to: