Re: [gentoo-dev] amd64 help

2007-01-29 Thread Danny van Dyk
Am Montag, 29. Januar 2007 00:26 schrieb Ciaran McCreesh: > On Sun, 28 Jan 2007 19:17:35 +0100 (MET) Christian Faulhammer > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > | As we all notice from time to time, amd64 team is lacking behind a > | bit, due to various reasons. a) manpower, b) a lot of keywording. > |

Re: [gentoo-dev] amd64 help

2007-01-28 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Sun, 28 Jan 2007 19:17:35 +0100 (MET) Christian Faulhammer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | As we all notice from time to time, amd64 team is lacking behind a | bit, due to various reasons. a) manpower, b) a lot of keywording. | Java team asked arch teams if they object when Java team marks stable

Re: [gentoo-dev] amd64 help

2007-01-28 Thread Mike Doty
Dan Meltzer wrote: On 1/28/07, Petteri Räty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Dan Meltzer wrote: > Isn't this kind of against what glep40 set out to do? > Top posting... Any way the thing was that the only change in these ebuilds are the eclasses/eclass functions used and the new eclasses have been

Re: [gentoo-dev] amd64 help

2007-01-28 Thread Petteri Räty
Dan Meltzer wrote: > On 1/28/07, Petteri Räty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Dan Meltzer wrote: >> > Isn't this kind of against what glep40 set out to do? >> > >> >> Top posting... >> >> Any way the thing was that the only change in these ebuilds are the >> eclasses/eclass functions used and the new

Re: [gentoo-dev] amd64 help

2007-01-28 Thread Dan Meltzer
On 1/28/07, Petteri Räty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Dan Meltzer wrote: > Isn't this kind of against what glep40 set out to do? > Top posting... Any way the thing was that the only change in these ebuilds are the eclasses/eclass functions used and the new eclasses have been proven stable already

Re: [gentoo-dev] amd64 help

2007-01-28 Thread Petteri Räty
Dan Meltzer wrote: > Isn't this kind of against what glep40 set out to do? > Top posting... Any way the thing was that the only change in these ebuilds are the eclasses/eclass functions used and the new eclasses have been proven stable already. Regards, Petteri signature.asc Description: Ope

Re: [gentoo-dev] amd64 help

2007-01-28 Thread Daniel Drake
Christian Faulhammer wrote: So, maybe we can discuss here another helping hand for amd64. Devs that work with a given software (not necessarily the maintainer) on amd64 architecture It seems like this should be discussed amongst the active amd64 developers internally first, and perhaps shoul

Re: [gentoo-dev] amd64 help

2007-01-28 Thread Dan Meltzer
Isn't this kind of against what glep40 set out to do? On 1/28/07, Christian Faulhammer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi, As we all notice from time to time, amd64 team is lacking behind a bit, due to various reasons. a) manpower, b) a lot of keywording. Java team asked arch teams if they object w

Re: [gentoo-dev] amd64 help

2007-01-28 Thread Ioannis Aslanidis
Sounds practical. That should save us some time. :) Christian Faulhammer wrote: Hi, As we all notice from time to time, amd64 team is lacking behind a bit, due to various reasons. a) manpower, b) a lot of keywording. Java team asked arch teams if they object when Java team marks stable generat

[gentoo-dev] amd64 help

2007-01-28 Thread Christian Faulhammer
Hi, As we all notice from time to time, amd64 team is lacking behind a bit, due to various reasons. a) manpower, b) a lot of keywording. Java team asked arch teams if they object when Java team marks stable generation-2 ebuilds on their own, due to the long time it takes and to the amount of ebui