Quoting Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > code that's not portable, then I don't see any point at all in treating > these as release architectures to begin with, because at that point > they're *not* shipping the same OS that the other architectures are.
Agreed, however, I would see "optional" packages, as, hm, optional. If for some arch an optional package doesn't build (or is impractical, like GNOME/KDE/OpenOffice for, say, m68k, IMHO) there is no problem. Cheers, WB -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
