Re: Why do we still have this on the distribution?

To: marcelo.magallon@gmail.com, debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Cc: debian-sparc@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Why do we still have this on the distribution?
From: Gürkan Sengün <sengun@phys.ethz.ch>
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 11:32:16 +0200
Message-id: <[🔎] 4253ACA0.2060102@phys.ethz.ch>
In-reply-to: <[🔎] 20050405154950.GA20666@kochab.efis.ucr.ac.cr>
References: <[🔎] 20050405154950.GA20666@kochab.efis.ucr.ac.cr>

Hi

 is I guess is better, but doesn't really help me understand some
 numbers others have posted (notably, that sparc is below the 98% line).


And what about packages that are i386 only, or everything but sparc?

There is quite some packages that are i386 only... packages being onlysparc, only silo comes to mind. (there sure are some more..)


Yours,
Guerkan

Reply to:

References:
- Why do we still have this on the distribution?
  - From: "Marcelo E. Magallon" <mmagallo@debian.org>

Prev by Date: Re: init.d script dependencies for etch?
Next by Date: Re: Alternative: Source-Centric Approach [w/code]
Previous by thread: Re: Why do we still have this on the distribution?
Next by thread: Bug#303307: ITP: freecycle -- a beat slicer
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread