On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 07:46:20PM -0800, Brian Nelson wrote: > "Noah L. Meyerhans" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 08:41:43PM +0200, Riku Voipio wrote: > > That's an interesting comparison. If you look at NetBSD, you'll see > > that they have a very similar problem to us: They have a really slow > > release cycle. I think at some point it really does come down to the > > size of the OS. At some point, I suspect that the Debian community is > > going to have to decide what it wants. Will it be frequent, up-to-date > > releases, or will it be support for every platform we can get our hands > > on? I don't think we can have both. > > What I fail to understand is why Debian insists on supporting every > single arch itself. Why not pick a handful of arches we do give a > flying fuck about, support those, and if some organization wants to port > Debian to another arch, then let them fork and support it themselves > (like Redhat->Yellow Dog)?
We have, there just happen to be 11 architectures we give a flying fuck about. I personally have Debian/sid on 4 1/2( x86, PPC32, SPARC, UltraSPARC, MIPSel) and I enjoy them all. - Nick Lopez [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Besides, a sysadmin without a condescending attitude is like a donut without jam. You can do it, but why bother?