Quoting Andres Salomon (2016-12-25 06:26:43) > On December 24, 2016 7:24:00 PM PST, Paul Wise <p...@debian.org> wrote: >>On Sun, Dec 25, 2016 at 10:38 AM, Andres Salomon wrote: >> >>> Thanks for the patch. Given that OLPC isn't really alive any more, >>> I'm thinking the OLPC packages should probably just be removed from >>the >>> archive for Stretch. Popcon shows exactly 1 installation of this >>> package.. https://qa.debian.org/popcon.php?package=olpc-xo1 >> >>I think you will find that OLPC is still active and recently made a >>release: >> >>http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/devel/2016-December/thread.html >> >>They also have a Debian derivative: >> >>https://wiki.debian.org/Derivatives/Census/OLPC >> >>I've asked James to respond to your mail. >> > > > I meant OLPC the hardware organization. > > I'm glad to see James is still producing Fedora-based images for > legacy hardware.
For the record, OLPC is still alive, and still (pay James Cameron to help prepare, and) release (Fedora-derived) system images for the (no longer sold) XO-1 laptop. > I'm pretty sure they haven't produced XO-1s in close to a decade, and > that us what my packages are for. XO-1.5 and XO-4 were never > supported without additional hacks. > > That said, I can orphan the packages; I just don't see much point with > such old hardware and the lack of package users. I agree it makes sense to drop this package: Despite the hardware vendor still issueing software, we can no longer do so, because the XO-1 uses an X86 chipset is incompatible with our i686 libc and kernel, I believe (I haven't tested for quite some time, though - please correct me if wrong). - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private