On Thursday 09 June 2005 13:59, Frederik Schueler wrote: > please find attached a patch adding the amd64 architecture to the > english release notes. I have one major problem with the patch, even after the reworking already done by Frank. You have disabled the whole chapter on upgrading, but there are still changes in that chapter regarding paths and URLs. IMO these changes have no use and should not be committed. Also I would propose the following textual changes. + <p>The AMD64 architecture is not officially supported, although a + complete port based on unpatched sources is available. Despite being + unofficial, this port has complete security support by the &debian; + security team, and is supported by the volatile and backports + services.</p> s/complete security support/full security support/ + <p>On the &arch-title; only a 2.6 kernel is available; + this has kernel version &kernelversion-2.6;. Note that Debian's 2.6.8 + kernel packages include the 2.6.8.1 kernel release and selected other + patches.</p> <p>On the &arch-title; only a 2.6 kernel is available with kernel version &kernelversion-2.6;. Note that Debian's 2.6.8 kernel packages include the 2.6.8.1 kernel release and selected other patches.</p> + <p>The AMD64 architecture supports only 2.6 kernels, because the + support in 2.4 kernels is limited and rudimentary. Additionally, the + glibc needs a tls and nptl aware kernel, features not supported by 2.4 + kernels at all.</p> <p>Because support for AMD64 in 2.4 kernels is limited and rudimentary, only 2.6 kernels are supported. Additionally, the glibc needs a tls and nptl aware kernel, features not supported by 2.4 kernels at all.</p> + <p>Since there is no &oldreleasename; of &debian; for the AMD64 + architecture, the following sections are intended for users + running a 2.4 based i386 installation and are going to reinstall + their systems to fully exploit the capabilities of the AMD64 + architecture.</p> s/running/currently running/ s/and are going to/and planning to/ Why is "reinstall" used here? Is upgrading not an option? Cheers, FJP
Attachment:
pgpncNBbiHBHb.pgp
Description: PGP signature