Alexander K. Hansen wrote: >On 3/9/06, Felix Ingrand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >>I must have missed the discussion on this, but is fink "ready" for >>Intel based machine? are the current binaries release universal >>already? or everything relies on Rosetta? >> >>Thanks, >> >>-- >> Felix >> >> >> >> > >Currently the Fink project plans NOT to make universal binaries. A >major reason for this is that our Debian toolset isn't really geared >to handle multiple-architecture builds. > > I applaud this decision, even if you aren't doing it for my own reasons. Personally, I feel that universal binaries benefit a vendor enormously, by reducing the number of distributions that need to be made, but since most users do not change their setup so oftten that they need the flexibility offered by the universal binaries, and they take up a lot more disk space, and I would expect, they probably load somewhat more slowly (merely a guess on this, but the larger disk size makes me wonder).
So, if I have an option, I will never choose to support universal binaries. Obviously, I won't always get this choice, but when I do, I choose non-universal. What's the name of a non-universal? >-- >Alexander K. Hansen >Fink Documenter >[Day Job] Levitated Dipole Experiment >http://psfcwww2.psfc.mit.edu/ldx/ > > >------------------------------------------------------- >This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language >that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast >and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! >http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=k&kid0944&bid$1720&dat1642 >_______________________________________________ >Fink-users mailing list >Fink-users@lists.sourceforge.net >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-users > > _______________________________________________ Fink-users mailing list Fink-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-users
