Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-core] crap use flags in the profiles

[Luis Medinas]

On Tue, 2005-08-30 at 15:57 -0400, Alec Warner wrote:
> Stephen P. Becker wrote:
>
> >>> Shouldn't this fall under the x86 arch team rather than releng? The
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> I'm sorry, but *what* x86 arch team?
> >
> >
> > That's the point.  Ciaran is just pointing out for the gazillionth
> > time that x86 is an unsupported arch, if you go by the standards the
> > other arches have to follow to be part of Gentoo.  When is this going
> > to be fixed?  Or, will it just be ignored until all the x86 folks get
> > amd64 machines and x86 pretty much becomes irrelevant?
> >
> > Is this also a good time to note that the amd64 and x86 could *easily*
> > be covered under the same keyword?  We cover a large variety of mips
> > machines/userlands under one keyword, with differences much more
> > significant then that between x86 and amd64.
> >
> > -Steve
>
> Any how many more x86 users are there than MIPS users to hit problems?
> How much worse is the QA in the x86/amd64 tree than the MIPS tree?  I'm
> not trying to bash either team here, just pointing out the facts.
>
> Alec Warner (antarus)

I belive the worse QA is in x86 and not in AMD64 and MIPS. Between AMD64
and x86 there's a lot of differences i.e. many packages in the tree that
needs to be patched to work on AMD64 so we cannot cover AMD64/x86 under
the same keyword. 
During this time i belive that the AMD64 arch team is doing QA job for
x86 arch too. Thanks to our Arch Testers we can test, patch and improve
the quality of the packages for AMD64 and for x86 too. I Belive that
MIPS team is doing the same thing they test packages then mark stable if
the packages are really stable. 
-- 
Luis Medinas <metalgod@g.o>
http://dev.gentoo.org/~metalgod
Gentoo Linux Developer: AMD64,Printing,app-cdr

-- 
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list