On Thu, Jan 12, 2006 at 07:17:48PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > Yes, 'm68k' and 'future' in one sentence. Amazing, isn't it? Surely we > must be joking? Hey, I haven't seen any activity wrt m68k archive (re)qualificiation. Given m68k's dropped back below the 95% cutoff (and has spent about 1/3rd of the last 90 days beneath it) and has a number of red squares still on the release arch qualification page it seems certain at this point that you won't get a "release arch" exception any time soon. Hurd and kfreebsd pages are at: http://wiki.debian.org/ArchiveQualification/kfreebsd-i386 http://wiki.debian.org/ArchiveQualification/hurd-i386 Please be as detailed as possible, and try to avoid referring to closed, unverifiable resources such as buildd.net. > Anyway. To cope with the above issues, the m68k port's developers have > been looking for alternatives for quite a while now. It has been > suggested that we start employing distcc or similar things so that we > would be able to use cross-compilers on much faster hardware, but for > various reasons this is not practical. BTW, it's not very encouraging when you say "Yes, we'll definitely try this and see how it works!" then, six months later, fail to have ever bothered, and can only handwave it away as being "impractical". Cheers, aj
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature