| 1 |
Stephen P. Becker wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
>>> Shouldn't this fall under the x86 arch team rather than releng? The |
| 4 |
>> |
| 5 |
>> |
| 6 |
>> |
| 7 |
>> I'm sorry, but *what* x86 arch team? |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> That's the point. Ciaran is just pointing out for the gazillionth |
| 11 |
> time that x86 is an unsupported arch, if you go by the standards the |
| 12 |
> other arches have to follow to be part of Gentoo. When is this going |
| 13 |
> to be fixed? Or, will it just be ignored until all the x86 folks get |
| 14 |
> amd64 machines and x86 pretty much becomes irrelevant? |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> Is this also a good time to note that the amd64 and x86 could *easily* |
| 17 |
> be covered under the same keyword? We cover a large variety of mips |
| 18 |
> machines/userlands under one keyword, with differences much more |
| 19 |
> significant then that between x86 and amd64. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> -Steve |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Any how many more x86 users are there than MIPS users to hit problems? |
| 24 |
How much worse is the QA in the x86/amd64 tree than the MIPS tree? I'm |
| 25 |
not trying to bash either team here, just pointing out the facts. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Alec Warner (antarus) |
| 28 |
-- |
| 29 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives