Re: Debian Archive architecture removals
+++ Lucas Nussbaum [2015-05-04 12:47 +0200]:
> On 04/05/15 at 18:04 +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> > On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 5:48 PM, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> > > Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@debian.org> (2015-05-04):
> > >> I'm wondering if we could find a way to accomodate those architectures
> > >> in an official way, while still limiting the impact on ftpmasters and
> > >> other teams. Maybe it's
> > >> just about supporting and advertising debian-ports as Debian's official
> > >> way to host second-class architectures.
I think that's the right way to do it, and the way things are, in
practice, done.
> > zumbi was working on moving debian-ports to debian.org infrastructure
> > <pabs> zumbi: this mail looks like it needs a status update re
> > ports.d.o [🔎] 20150504062822.GA24735@xanadu.blop.info">https://lists.debian.org/[🔎] 20150504062822.GA24735@xanadu.blop.info
> > <zumbi> pabs: we had this: https://titanpad.com/debian-ports
>
> That pad says: "As a result of current state, d-ports cannot accept more
> ports". If that's still true, it would make sense to postpone dropping
> hurd and sparc until this is fixed...
Was that before or after arm64 and ppc64el migrated off ports to the
main archive? That should have freed up some space and resource?
Wookey
--
Principal hats: Linaro, Debian, Wookware, ARM
http://wookware.org/
Reply to: