On Fri, Sep 23, 2005 at 02:06:22PM +0200, Andreas Jochens wrote: > On 05-Sep-23 13:16, Sven Luther wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 23, 2005 at 12:09:17PM +0200, Andreas Jochens wrote: > > > On 05-Sep-23 10:17, Sven Luther wrote: > > > > x apparently already builds just fine in 64bit mode, or at least Andreas > > > > Jochens has done it, and if multi-arch ever becomes really usable, then > > > > another approach would be needed, in the meantime, the biarch is > > > > support we > > > > will have for etch. > > > > > > 'xorg-x11' indeed builds fine on the native 64-bit ppc64 port when the > > > patch from BTS #319178 is applied. That patch just adds minimal > > > support to make the package build on the ppc64 architecture: > > > > Notice in any case that this patch is probably not going to be used in any > > case, since we will either go biarch for etch, or real multi-arch, which > > hasn't been decided yet, and that in any case the 64bit name will be > > powerpc64, not ppc64. > > Please do not start the naming debate for the ppc64 port again. > This has been discussed and decided months ago.
Decided ? i don't think i was part of this discussion, and with the ppc/ppc64 kernel upstream thingy changing to a single powerpc one, things did indeed change. > The Debian packaging name is 'ppc64' which conforms to the LSB. > This name is already used by dpkg, apt and many other packages. Well, we will see. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
