On Mon 12 Oct 1998, Hartmut Koptein wrote: > > > to increase communication betweenm the ports and between porters and > > > non-porters, I'd propose a new list: > > > > > > debian-porting > > > or sim. > > > > I fully support this proposal (The name debian-porting seems fine to me) > > No, we haven't enough topics for this new list.
It would be a useful way of communicating diffs that were necessary to build a package on a given architecture (those diffs usually involve fixing some silly packaging bug, and are then applicable to all other architectures on which the package is to be ported). > > IMHO, it makes sence to create a new list, since it seems 90% of the > > Debian developers use i386 only... > > :-) debian/i386 is also a port! No. For 90% (I think more) of the packages it is the primary architecture. The word "port" implies carrying to _another_ architecture. Hence the package on the primary architecture is _not_ a port. I'm thinking of using my Alpha as primary platform for my packages, let the i386 people take care of porting them! (Although I think that porting would never happen...) Paul Slootman -- home: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | work: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | debian: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.wurtel.demon.nl | Murphy Software, Enschede, the Netherlands