Re: Status of 'sarge' for the amd64 architecture
In article <[🔎] 20050423221757.GF25852@mauritius.dodds.net>,
Steve Langasek <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>On Sun, Apr 24, 2005 at 12:12:42AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
>> Le samedi 23 avril 2005 à 13:20 -0700, Steve Langasek a écrit :
>> > We are already running into size constraints (on an ongoing basis) with our
>> > mirrors due to the size of the archive.
>> Given that - if I believe the security team  - we are not able to
>> provide security updates for arm, even in woody, is there any point in
>> including it in sarge when we could include an architecture with working
>> autobuilders just in place?
>If we dropped arm, it would be to drop arm, not to trade it for something --
>it's way too late to be talking about adding amd64 to the main archive for
True, we don't want to miss the release date of September 2004.
Oh, wait ...
One suspects that Chaucer would feel right at home on Usenet
-- The Jargon File, "flame".