Dear archive admins,
we have so far not received a reply or statement from you regarding the
below post, or to the post by Steve Langasek with the message-id of
20080815052538.gw6...@dario.dodds.net.
If we missed a reply, please let us know and repost it.
for the Debian GNU/Hurd porters,
Micha
Hi,
first of all, we are a bit unsure about the intended timeline. Do you
plan to remove architectures which fail to release for the next two
releases (i.e. lenny and lenny+1), or will you impose this new policy
retro-actively for the etch and lenny releases, i.e. kill off the ports
on relatively
On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 06:59:24PM +1000, Joshua Cummings wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-08-15 at 11:32 +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 05:25:38AM +, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > > So the current architectures I see wishlist bugs for on ftp.d.o are s390x,
> > > sh[34]{,eb}, netbsd
Joshua Cummings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (19/08/2008):
> Unfortunately, ZFS is not currently available in GNU/kFreeBSD, but,
> depending on licensing issues, could possibly be supported eventually.
For interested people, see [EMAIL PROTECTED] and
below.
Mraw,
KiBi.
signature.asc
Description: Digital
On Fri, 2008-08-15 at 11:32 +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 05:25:38AM +, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > So the current architectures I see wishlist bugs for on ftp.d.o are s390x,
> > sh[34]{,eb}, netbsd-i386, and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64}.
> >
> > Which of these are currently i
Well, there was talk about implementing a Platform: field in dpkg to
mark a package Linux, Kfreebsd, or Hurd specific without having to
adding !kfreebsd-i386, etc. to the arch list or P-a-s. Not sure where
that went (although I think dpkg now recognizes the field, which means
quinn-diff and perhaps
Michael Casadevall wrote
> kfreebsd-* is pretty close to releasable; they've got the archive
> built in the high 80s, and are keeping up).
BTW, it may be worth noting that a bunch of packages still include
headers: in the Failed part of hurd-i386, 178 packages out
of 1320 fail at least because of
On 11478 March 1977, Ingo Juergensmann wrote:
>> > In the absence of an explanation why this change is needed, I suggest
>> > "don't
>> > change what's not broken" as a sane alternative.
>> The fact that we currently have *no* guidelines at all is broken, so we fix
>> it.
> It would be nice, tho
On Fri, Aug 15, 2008, Bastian Blank wrote:
> There is some. IBM likes to add new op-codes to every processor release
> and with a higher minimum supported type they can be used. They often
> provide a speed benefit. Also the instruction format is identical
> between the 31 and 64bit code. I would l
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I have a local mirror of m68k, and both kfreebsd ports, and they're
roughly 70-80GB including source. If ries has become so full that
space is becoming an issue, then dropping arm, hurd-i386, and m68k is
a stopgap move at best (your only going to recov
On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 06:45:30PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 09:59:01AM +0200, Ingo Juergensmann a écrit :
> > I believe that changing the release scheme to not release the whole archive
> > in one release but do some sort of subreleases (base, X, database, ...) is
> >
Le Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 09:59:01AM +0200, Ingo Juergensmann a écrit :
>
> I believe that changing the release scheme to not release the whole archive
> in one release but do some sort of subreleases (base, X, database, ...) is
> not going to be considered as "sane alternative"... ;)
Hi Ingo
Tha
On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 05:25:38AM +, Steve Langasek wrote:
> So the current architectures I see wishlist bugs for on ftp.d.o are s390x,
> sh[34]{,eb}, netbsd-i386, and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64}.
>
> Which of these are currently in a more releasable state than hurd-i386?
kfreebsd has a fully wo
Why do I see a deja-vue? I think we had this already some years ago.
On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 10:25:38PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> So the current architectures I see wishlist bugs for on ftp.d.o are s390x,
> sh[34]{,eb}, netbsd-i386, and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64}.
The sh* ports are not dead? I've
On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 11:07:08AM +0300, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> pe, 2008-08-15 kello 09:59 +0200, Ingo Juergensmann kirjoitti:
> > True. I would rather like to see the m68k porters to spend their time on
> > real porting issues than on establishing the infrastructure that is needed
> > because of
On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 05:51:00AM +0200, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> > Is this a unanimous decision of the ftp team? You say that discussions were
> > had at DebConf 8, but not all of the ftp team (or even all of the ftp
> > masters) are present there...
> I know that not all of us have been here. Wh
pe, 2008-08-15 kello 09:59 +0200, Ingo Juergensmann kirjoitti:
> True. I would rather like to see the m68k porters to spend their time on
> real porting issues than on establishing the infrastructure that is needed
> because of the immanent drop.
It seems to me that _if_ the proposed change happe
On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 05:56:33PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> If we aren't really running
> into resource constraints linked to the architecture count, it's a poor use
> of people's time to have to redeploy all of the ftp-master infrastructure on
> a separate host.
True. I would rather like t
On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 05:51:00AM +0200, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> > I feel I'm missing the full rationale for this change. What are the new
> > architectures in the pipe that space needs to be made for?
> There are multiple bugs in the ftp.debian.org pseudopackage about
> architectures wanting to
On 11478 March 1977, Steve Langasek wrote:
>> - If an architecture fails to be included in 2 successive official
>>releases, it is moved out of the official archive (and away from the
>>ftp-master.debian.org host).
>> - We (as in ftpteam) are happy to help in any possible way in a mo
On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 08:58:12PM +0200, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> with the Lenny release upcoming we are thinking about larger changes to
> the Debian archive, of which one point is "Clean up the supported
> architecture list to free up space for new ones".
> So we had a few discussions during Deb
21 matches
Mail list logo
