Roger Leigh <rle...@codelibre.net> writes: > On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 07:28:31PM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote:
>> I've always thought that eliding linux in the architecture was pretty >> confusing for people, which tend to consider it any-<arch> instead of >> linux-<arch>. And I added the alias with the intent to be able to >> possibly fix that in the future, but never bothered pushing for it >> given that such change is probably too contentious, probably as >> confusing or more during the transition period, and because at the time >> there was only hurd as the other non-linux architecture >> Now that we have few non-linux architectures on the archive it might >> be time to consider discussing it? > I was planning on bringing this up last year, but didn't have time > to persue it. I would certainly agree that migrating to linux-<arch> > is beneficial and it certainly gets my vote. It seems like a waste of effort to me, and it would be a fair bit of effort given that many of the i386 packages are *not* going to work with hurd-i386. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
