On Mon, Mar 13, 2006 at 10:38:52AM +0100, Pjotr Kourzanov wrote: > Wouter Verhelst wrote: > >Not being a dpkg maintainer, I find this to be a gratuitous change for > >no good reason (other than "it looks a bit better"). I don't see what > >point it would serve.
> Maybe the ability to run Debian on embedded or old systems? > AFAIK, there is currently no support for running Debian with uclibc... Wouter is referring to the naming change. Indeed I agree, changing naming conventions is troublesome, and discussions about what naming convention "looks good" are endless. Essentially it's a "color of the bikeshed" [1] issue. As for debian with uClibc, there is SLIND[2] which uses uclibc-i386 / uclibc-arm/ uclibc-powerpc and i386-uclibc[3] alioth project, which is quite staganant ATM and hasn't selected arch name yet. [1] http://www.unixguide.net/freebsd/faq/16.19.shtml [2] http://www.emdebian.org/slind.html [3] http://alioth.debian.org/projects/i386-uclibc/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
