On Wed, 2012-05-16 at 13:38 +0100, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
> The table seems to be missing portbox: io
> As KiBi mentioned they porter boxes are not administered by DSA *yet*.
Thanks to DSA, this is no longer the case - falla and fischer now exist.
Regards,
Adam
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
Robert Millan (16/05/2012):
> Does asdfasdf have i386 chroots? If not, is it feasible to add them?
> Would then asdfasdf qualify as porter box for kfreebsd-i386?
AFAICT: no, yes, no.
DSA said they were willing to set up porterboxes “in time” though, so
I wouldn't worry too much about it if I we
2012/5/16 Adam D. Barratt :
> On 16.05.2012 13:38, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
>>
>> The table seems to be missing portbox: io
>
>
> aiui, io's still down to all intents and purposes; if that's correct then it
> doesn't really qualify as a porterbox right now.
Does asdfasdf have i386 chroots? If no
Hi,
Thanks for the quick response.
On 16.05.2012 13:38, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
The table seems to be missing portbox: io
aiui, io's still down to all intents and purposes; if that's correct
then it doesn't really qualify as a porterbox right now.
Regards,
Adam
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, emai
Hi Adam,
The table seems to be missing portbox: io
As KiBi mentioned they porter boxes are not administered by DSA *yet*.
Also for both arches we could say users: 50 (popcon)
I also wrote some brief narrative at:
http://wiki.debian.org/ArchiveQualification/Wheezy#Status_of_kfreebsd-.7Bamd64.2Ci
Hi,
With the sound of the ever approaching freeze ringing loudly in our ears,
we're (somewhat belatedly) looking at finalising the list of release
architectures for the Wheezy release.
Comments on / additions and corrections to the content of
http://release.debian.org/wheezy/arch_qualify.html wou
6 matches
Mail list logo
