On Mon, Dec 04, 2006 at 07:46:55PM -0800, Rob Browning wrote:
>
> In the latest upload of stalin (a new version), I removed arm and m68k
> from the architecture list. However, I wanted to double-check and
> make sure that was appropriate.
>
> I believe compiling stalin with gcc now requires a bi
Wookey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The 'hedges' machine waiting for DSA attention has 512MB. Arms with
> 1GB are now possible but rare. Debian will probably get one
> eventually but no immediate prospect of that.
Just having enough swap might be sufficient. I suppose that depends
on how long t
On Mon, Dec 04, 2006 at 07:46:55PM -0800, Rob Browning wrote:
>
> In the latest upload of stalin (a new version), I removed arm and m68k
> from the architecture list. However, I wanted to double-check and
> make sure that was appropriate.
>
> I believe compiling stalin with gcc now requires a bi
On 2006-12-05 09:26 +0100, Michael Schmitz wrote:
> > I believe compiling stalin with gcc now requires a bit over 1GB.
> > i.e. gcc's VSS grows to a bit over 1GB. Ignoring any other concerns,
> > it didn't look like the arm and m68k buildds would be likely to handle
> > that very well.
> >
> > How
> I believe compiling stalin with gcc now requires a bit over 1GB.
> i.e. gcc's VSS grows to a bit over 1GB. Ignoring any other concerns,
> it didn't look like the arm and m68k buildds would be likely to handle
> that very well.
>
> However, if the buildd admins are willing to make sure that the
>
In the latest upload of stalin (a new version), I removed arm and m68k
from the architecture list. However, I wanted to double-check and
make sure that was appropriate.
I believe compiling stalin with gcc now requires a bit over 1GB.
i.e. gcc's VSS grows to a bit over 1GB. Ignoring any other co
Jeroen van Wolffelaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Why was support dropped for arm and m68k?
I believe compiling stalin with gcc now requires a bit over 1GB.
i.e. gcc's VSS grows to a bit over 1GB. Ignorning any other concerns,
it didn't look like any of the arm or m68k buildds would be likely
tags 398879 moreinfo
thanks
On Wed, Nov 15, 2006 at 11:03:00PM -0800, Rob Browning wrote:
> The stalin package has dropped support for arm and m68k and added
> support for a couple of other architectures.
Why was support dropped for arm and m68k? Did you contact the respective
porters about this?
Package: ftp.debian.org
The stalin package has dropped support for arm and m68k and added
support for a couple of other architectures. I was told that I might
need to notify you about that.
Version 0.11-1 should supersede the older versions. If nothing else,
it clears up the licensing issues.
9 matches
Mail list logo
