-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> And keeping IA64 in the loop is just another joke from the release >> team. It'd be interesting to find out, but I bet more m68ks were sold >> than IA64 last year. > > Which of these two architectures are you more likely to be able to run a > current 2.6 kernel on, BTW? I fail to see why this matters at all. It's not in your list of requirements, remember ? > You do know that m68k is the only architecture still carrying around > 2.*2* kernels in sarge? Yes. But there are 2.4 kernels available too, don't forget to mention that fact. No 2.6, though, but that's not a problem right now. Might become a problem for etch, I agree. m68k folks, is there anything in the works for 2.6 ? > The inclusion of ia64 in the release count is a projection, based on > where I believe things are today. Nothing the release team is doing > ensures that ia64 is going to be a viable port, a year from now when > we're trying to release etch; and nothing says that one or more of the > other ports won't be in a position to meet those criteria and get added > to the release list. What Thomas Bushnell said. JB. - -- Julien BLACHE - Debian & GNU/Linux Developer - <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Public key available on <http://www.jblache.org> - KeyID: F5D6 5169 GPG Fingerprint : 935A 79F1 C8B3 3521 FD62 7CC7 CD61 4FD7 F5D6 5169 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/> iD8DBQFCNrAbzWFP1/XWUWkRArlpAJ9Os1Fl9XP7EjkaZieoCiLzHbqxdQCeJSW7 gSC/WuUfQdEkAfZsrM6Vl9k= =uZIr -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
