On 08/31/2011 11:35 AM, Andreas Barth wrote: > * Lucas Nussbaum (lu...@lucas-nussbaum.net) [110831 10:56]: >> Also, in the case of architectures targetted at embedded systems (I'm >> thinking about mips and mipsel), what is important is that Debian >> infrastructure supports the development of those architectures, but I >> don't think that there's much to gain by being officially supported if >> it's only used in production through derivatives that can provide the >> official support. > > You are aware that there are mipsel netbooks? And arm tablets? There > is hardware running standard Debian, and that's one of the large > advantages of Debian. I don't want to give that up.
Strong ack. Not to forget various NAS and embedded boxes like the Sheevaplug which are shipped with Debian (or Ubuntu..). >> hurd-i386, kfreebsd-i386 and kfreebsd-amd64 are probably too >> experimental to be used on production systems. For kfreebsd, my main >> problem (with my Ruby hat) is the linuxthreads-based thread library, but >> there might be other problems. > > I know people who put kbsd on edge firewalls because it's way easier > for a standard linux / debian admin. And please don't put hurd-i386 in > the same camp as kbsd. They're not. Hurd is far away from being useful while kfreebsd offers a great mic of a good kernel and a usable userland (instead of the imho slightly annoying FreeBSD userland). Definitely not a playground. -- Bernd Zeimetz Debian GNU/Linux Developer http://bzed.de http://www.debian.org GPG Fingerprints: ECA1 E3F2 8E11 2432 D485 DD95 EB36 171A 6FF9 435F -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4e5e0697.30...@bzed.de