On Tue, Oct 17, 2006 at 01:42:07PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: > On Sun, Sep 17, 2006 at 11:55:02PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > > It's with some regret that I have to confirm that m68k is not going to be a > > release architecture for etch. > > > We have also asked about removing m68k from testing since it is not > > currently a release candidate; Anthony Towns has indicated his preference > > to defer this until another solution can be implemented for m68k's needs. > > This raises the question again of what such a structure should look like; I > > think it would be a good idea for us to begin to tackle this question, > > It's just short of a month since Steve posted this, with, as far as > I've seen, no concrete suggestions on what the m68k porters want to do > about this. I expect we'll be dropping m68k from etch fairly shortly, > unless someone comes up with a plan for supporting a "Debian 4.0-m68k" > release in the next few days.
What is the point of removing Etch from testing given it is ignored for testing propagation anyway ? There is plenty of time for debian-m68k to catch up during the freeze. Cheers, -- Bill. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Imagine a large red swirl here. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
