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

Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

I demand that Anthony Towns may or may not have written...

> Michael K. Edwards wrote:
>> I think Sarge on ARM has the potential to greatly reduce the learning
>> curve for some kinds of embedded development, especially if Iyonix
>> succeeds in its niche (long live the Acorn!).

> So, I looked at the website, but all I can see are expensive PCs that
> happen to have an arm chip.

FWIW, they're not the only ARM-based desktop boxes which are currently
available, although I'm not sure about the situation wrt Linux.

> Put them behind a firewall on a trusted LAN, use them to develop software
> for arm chips, and then just follow unstable or run non-security-supported
> snapshots. Apart from writing software for embedded arm things, I can't see
> the value

"Linux desktop box" comes to mind...

> -- and if an arch is just going to be used for development, does it really
> need all the support we give stable in order to make it useful for servers
> and such?

Probably not, but ISTM that you'll first have to ascertain that it *is* only
being used for development before you can say that that support definitely
isn't needed.

> If so, why? If not, what level of support does it need, that goes beyond
> "unstable + snapshotting facility", and why? Debian developers [...]

You're focusing too much on development here. There are users too, you
know... :-)

> I guess this is really the wrong place to ask for "we use these machines"
> answers instead of "we develop for these machines", but hey.

I don't think that there's any need to *guess*... ;-)

| Darren Salt   | linux (or ds) at | nr. Ashington,
| woody, sarge, | youmustbejoking  | Northumberland
| RISC OS       | demon co uk      | Toon Army
|   <URL:http://www.youmustbejoking.demon.co.uk/progs.linux.html>

You will spend the rest of your life in the future.

Reply to: