* Frans Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-09-06 18:26]:
> - Is it really worth the effort when the actual difference between the
> versions are so increadibly minimal? The same could be achieved by
> a simple added para explaining the differences.
> - The extra work caused for translators at this l
On Saturday 06 September 2008, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> Adding support for armel to the manual seems rather easy. I came up
> with the patch below that seems to work for me. Any comments?
The patch looks OK at first glance.
I just hope no arch conditions have been forgotten.
My main objections
Also, if you still want an armel version of the manual, please
bring that subject up on the list with some argumentation as to
why you feel it is needed.
My main argument is that arm and armel have different
subarchitectures: arm has Netwinder support, but armel has Versatile
support.
3 matches
Mail list logo
