[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: *confusion*

Martin Michlmayr <tbm@cyrius.com> writes:

> * Thomas Bushnell, BSG <tb@becket.net> [20020101 13:24]:
> > I'm afraid that doesn't answer my question.  
> It's another architecture (like sparc or alpha) which has will however
> not be released with woody.  They stopped uploading new packages a
> while ago and thus package dependencies are broken.  Since sh is not a
> candidate for woody, you can simply ignore this.

Ah, thanks.  Now I understand.  

Can we prune it from the QA lists?  It would make them a better tool,
I think.

Reply to: