Re: Linuxtag 2004: Different Stuff
Michael Banck wrote:
> On Tue, May 18, 2004 at 06:27:17PM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> > We need something to explain Debian's failure to support AMD64
> > "natively". Some FAQ with good answers written by amd64-port experts, to
> > be learned by the booth personal, so we can tell the visitors plausible
> > answers.
>
> Are you trolling?
I guess, it's rather that we should be prepared for similar questions,
and should have thought about answers such as mixed 32/64-bit approach
required to get software from ISV run on it as well, which in turn
requires a redesign / drastical changes in our internal packaging
structure, which cannot be done this short before a release.
> Sarge is not even out, so how could we "support" amd64? I don't think
> anybody remotely sane would expect us to officially release an amd64
> port before sarge.
>
> And as we will be burning CDs for the other ports anyway, why not for
> amd64 as well? True-64bit seems to be in a good enough shape that it
> might work out with d-i until then. And pretty much the only thing
> missing is a place on ftp.debian.org, but there is an repository on
> alioth anyway. So I don't see where we 'fail to support AMD64 natively'.
The problem with Tru64 is that it's useless when it comes to interoperability
with other distributions. For that, i386 is as good, so no other "port" is
required.
Regards,
Joey
--
Ten years and still binary compatible. -- XFree86
Reply to: