1 |
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 9:34 AM, Burcin Erocal <burcin@××××××.org> wrote: |
2 |
> On Wed, 16 Nov 2011 08:29:00 -0600 |
3 |
> Jeremy Olexa <darkside@g.o> wrote: |
4 |
> |
5 |
>> Fabian and I discussed dropping ia64-linux support. Time to face |
6 |
>> reality, we don't use it and we don't test it... Does anyone out there |
7 |
>> care about ia64-linux? |
8 |
> |
9 |
> I do. :) |
10 |
> |
11 |
> There are still many scientific users who have itanium boxes left |
12 |
> around. Even if they are migrating away from them, I'm sure these are |
13 |
> still used if possible. |
14 |
> |
15 |
> I haven't tried prefix on an ia64 box yet. We have one with gentoo on |
16 |
> it already. I can use that if you need someone to test stuff. |
17 |
|
18 |
So, the ML is not an extremely popular place to ask such a question |
19 |
with only ~210 people subscribed but I can only assume that it is a |
20 |
good subset of people that rely on Gentoo Prefix for $important |
21 |
reasons (business, personal, etc). With that, there was one response |
22 |
and you haven't even used it yet, Burcin. |
23 |
|
24 |
Therefore, I propose to drop the keyword(s) and leave the profiles for |
25 |
now. Similar to what I did for arm-linux. That way, when you get |
26 |
around to trying ia64-linux, you have most of the guts and just need |
27 |
to modify ACCEPT_KEYWORDS, etc. |
28 |
|
29 |
Sounds like a fair compromise to me that sets proper expectations for |
30 |
future Gentoo Prefix users. |
31 |
-Jeremy |