Hi,
> > Best option to get off etch in the short term, yes.
> >
>
> We could start here, then work towards a general lenny-m68k release.
Yep.
And I did not mean to suggest we build absolutely everything in lenny.
> > On the porting, toolchain and buildd front I've been largely silent in the
> > last
> > months - unfortunately, that won't change in the forseeable future.
> >
>
> The toolchain is actually not that bad of shape, TLS aside. Most of
> the issues should clear up once we have a more modern glibc :-/
Still leaves the issue of running buildd and handling logs.
> > Helpers in those areas don't need to be Debian developers after our move to
> > ports?
> >
>
> You still need to be a DD to upload to the ports archive unless we
> want to forgo the possibility of recycling binaries if/should we
> return to the main archive.
Can we have a show of hands with respect to this point? I brought that up last
year as a way to make re-inclusion easier but it is by no means clear that this
will actually help at all.
At this time, I would rather consider dropping that requirement.
Survival of the port may ultimately depend more on attracting new helpers than
on re-inclusion in the main distribution.
Michael
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-68k-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
