On 28/07/14 22:35, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> On 25/07/14 01:14, peter green wrote:
>> When you are added to testing you will be added as a "broken and fucked"
>> (release team's terminology not mine) architecture. To get out of this state
>> you
>> will need to get and keep your port in a he
On 25/07/14 01:14, peter green wrote:
> When you are added to testing you will be added as a "broken and fucked"
> (release team's terminology not mine) architecture. To get out of this state
> you
> will need to get and keep your port in a healthy state in testing. That will
> mean fixing (in som
Breno Leitao wrote:
Hi Peter,
Thank you for your reply.
On 07/24/2014 08:14 PM, peter green wrote:
Note: this is the perspective of a dd who is not directly involved with powerc
though I have come across some of your bug reports, nor am I a member of the ftp
or release teams. It's probablly
Hi Peter,
Thank you for your reply.
On 07/24/2014 08:14 PM, peter green wrote:
> Note: this is the perspective of a dd who is not directly involved with powerc
> though I have come across some of your bug reports, nor am I a member of the
> ftp
> or release teams. It's probablly mostly right but
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 11:29:19PM +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> I'm not sure what your point is.
>
> Maybe “crazy how ppc64 people got interested in getting their packages
> built as opposed to getting debian.org ports page updated”? Anyway, if
> you want to know about the port, see the wiki[1]
Lennart Sorensen (2014-07-25):
> On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 06:48:13PM +0100, peter green wrote:
> > Not in debian proper but it is on debian-ports.org and it appears to
> > be pretty healthy.
>
> Hmm, not listed under the official nor unofficial debian ports, while
> ppc64el is.
>
> https://www.de
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 06:48:13PM +0100, peter green wrote:
> Not in debian proper but it is on debian-ports.org and it appears to
> be pretty healthy.
Hmm, not listed under the official nor unofficial debian ports, while
ppc64el is.
https://www.debian.org/ports/
ppc64el listed, ppc64 is not.
Lennart Sorensen wrote:
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 12:14:08AM +0100, peter green wrote:
Another question the ftpmasters will likely have is what is the
relationship between ppc64 and ppc64el. Is there hardware that will
run ppc64 but not ppc64el? is there hardware that will run ppc64el
but not p
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 12:14:08AM +0100, peter green wrote:
> Another question the ftpmasters will likely have is what is the
> relationship between ppc64 and ppc64el. Is there hardware that will
> run ppc64 but not ppc64el? is there hardware that will run ppc64el
> but not ppc64? is there hardwar
Note: this is the perspective of a dd who is not directly involved with
powerc though I have come across some of your bug reports, nor am I a
member of the ftp or release teams. It's probablly mostly right but i'm
sure others will point out any errors.
I would like to share the ppc64el port's
On 10/07/14 22:38, Breno Leitao wrote:
> Hi Adam,
>
> On 07/10/2014 05:28 PM, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
>> On Thu, 2014-07-10 at 17:08 -0300, Breno Leitao wrote:
>>> I would like to share the ppc64el port's status with you, and check if
>>> it is feasible to consider it as an official port for the ne
Hi Adam,
On 07/10/2014 05:28 PM, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On Thu, 2014-07-10 at 17:08 -0300, Breno Leitao wrote:
>> I would like to share the ppc64el port's status with you, and check if
>> it is feasible to consider it as an official port for the next Debian
>> release, or, what it may be missing
On Thu, 2014-07-10 at 17:08 -0300, Breno Leitao wrote:
> I would like to share the ppc64el port's status with you, and check if
> it is feasible to consider it as an official port for the next Debian
> release, or, what it may be missing for that. We are eager to work on the
> missing parts.
Apolo
13 matches
Mail list logo
