Re: m68k not a release arch for etch; status in testing, future plans?
On Sep 19, 2006, at 6:12 AM, Stephen R Marenka wrote:
I think we do need to have a discussion about ports that don't
full archive, but otherwise can make a stable release and get security
support. Certainly m68k and likely arm users won't be running all the
latest bloatware and thus don't need to be building it (how long would
it take to load openoffice under kde on my m68k mac or even the
ataris?). But drawing that line can be tricky because of dependencies.
I don't think anyone who really cares about the issue has come up
good way to frame the discussion or draw those lines yet.
I'd be interested in participating in this discussion. I think an
awful lot of it also applies to s390. In that case, often the
horsepower *is* at least theoretically available, but you don't
*want* your Linux guest under VM (one of dozens) using much CPU, you
don't *have* any actual graphics hardware available, and almost no
one is using the box to do anything desktop-like at all (the major
exception being applications that presume you're installing them from
an X display).
Assuming that the dependency issue could be solved pretty cleanly,
yeah, Debian on s/390 could get by with many, many packages removed,
with little to no inconvenience to its actual users. In a lot of
ways the niches for small Linux/390 virtual machines are very much
like the niches for the NSLU2 (an arm-based device) and I think the
two worlds could learn a lot from each other, and collectively have a
lot to teach the world-of-people-using-big-spiffy-graphical-machines-