On Sun, 2017-02-19 at 12:41 +0100, Holger Wansing wrote: > Ben Hutchings <b...@decadent.org.uk> wrote: [...] > > there is also no armmp-lpae flavour of the installer for armel. Please > > delete that as well. > > Hmm, the table has armmp-lpae only for armhf, not for armel. Do you want me > to remove that one for armhf?
Yes, I meant armhf. [...] > > Finally, two of the architectures are missing documentation of their > > installer flavours: > > > > - For i386 there are default and xen installer flavours. The xen > > That would mean, we have to add 2 "flavor" entries for i386? > How would we name them? Some proposal below in the table ... > The "default" entries are not optimal ... Yes, but I can't think how better to label it. > > installer flavour is needed for Xen PV domains only. > > - For powerpc there are powerpc and powerpc64 installer flavours. > > I believe powerpc64 is needed on all systems with 64-bit > > OpenFirmware. > > That means the same? Add to flavors for ppc64el? How to name them? > I am confused here, powerpc is no release arch anymore, right? [...] No, I don't mean ppc64el. I looked at the published version of the installation manual so I didn't see you already removed powerpc a few hours earlier. (Should non-release architectures really be removed completely from the installation manual? It seems like they should be excluded from the published versions for stable and testing, but not removed altogether. I don't know how difficult that would be to arrange.) Ben. -- Ben Hutchings If at first you don't succeed, you're doing about average.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
