Andreas Tille <andr...@an3as.eu> writes: > On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 07:41:51AM +0100, Luk Claes wrote: >> >> I think one would be surprised how many packages get used on 'exotic' >> architectures. Most users don't specifically search for a piece of >> software, they want to have some specific task done by using a specific >> package. Not providing the package will only mean that the user either >> uses another package or does not get the task done. > > Well, I do not think that you can do gene sequencing or number crunching > on current mobile phones. So there are really programs which are not > needed on all architectures and even if you find a binary package which > claims to do the job it is just useless. Even if I agree with your > arguing that each program at least theoretically should build on any > architecture (if not it is a bug) in some cases it looks foolish to > provide binary packages just for the sake of it. This is was Charles > meant when he wrote: We should trust the maintainer if a specific > program is not needed for a certain architecture.
And then someone comes along and builds a Supercomputer cluster out of game consoles. With the way energy consumption becomes important I would not be surprised to see an arm supercomputer cluster next. MfG Goswin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org