Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Dirkjan Ochtman <djc@g.o>
To: Gentoo Development <gentoo-dev@l.g.o>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] The status of the 'minor' arches in gentoo
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 09:32:08
Message-Id: CAKmKYaDTA4XX=u2HwW7Vk8GRwo+2h_z3ctj1Bn3jp1=2cFq29w@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] The status of the 'minor' arches in gentoo by Agostino Sarubbo
1 On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 5:03 PM, Agostino Sarubbo <ago@g.o> wrote:
2 > Now, imho, we have 2 choice:
3 >
4 > 1)Support them with an iso or at least a manual if we can't do an handbook
5 > 2)Lose the stable keyword and don't waste manpower anymore.
6 >
7 > What do you think about?
8
9 I haven't seen many problems, except one point: that m68k seems to
10 have much the same level of activity as mips, and it would be nice if
11 we could drop it down in the little CC list on Bugzilla (to the
12 unstable arches part).
13
14 Cheers,
15
16 Dirkjan

Replies

Subject Author
[gentoo-dev] Re: The status of the 'minor' arches in gentoo Ryan Hill <dirtyepic@g.o>