Re: amd64: ftp-masters questions
Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sun, 2004-12-12 at 00:05 +0100, Santiago Vila wrote: >> On Sat, 11 Dec 2004, Martin Michlmayr - Debian Project Leader wrote: >> >> > My recollection is that all technical concerns were addressed and that >> > the port would go in after the mirror issues will be sorted out (which >> > will happen some point after sarge). >> >> Why after sarge? Nobody knows when sarge will be released. The arguments voiced were that the mirrors don't have enough space for all of debian anymore and new architectures would only be added after SCC (second class citizens, i.e. per architecture archives for partial mirrors) has been implemented. This entails two things (at least): 1. software changes (believed to be all done and in cvs) 2. policy changes for mirrors (put off until sarge is out) Activation of above changes is also put off until after sarge probably in fear of disrupting the archive while the sarge release is being done. [This is all second/third/fourth hand knowledge and I do not speak for ftp-master or the mirror team.] Also note that soon 5 primary mirrors will carry debian-amd64 at twice the space (a second set of 99% identical sources) on their own. > Exactly. If Sarge had been released in October or November, that > would be one thing, but no one knows when it will be released. > > Thus, IMO, the AMD64 "gcc-3.4" branch should be moved into Sarge. No way, please not gcc-3.4 and not sarge. First of all the standard compiler for debian is 3.3 and works well on amd64 too. The 3.3 branch (pure64) is better maintained and tested having both sarge and sid. Secondly the gcc-3.4 branch is now morphing into a 4.0 branch becoming even more experimental. Thirdly any move to sarge has to be preceeded by a move to sid. By all means go for amd64 in sid but please keep sarge out of it. That is step 2, needs a lot of testing in sid first and is the RMs decision. MfG Goswin
Re: amd64: ftp-masters questions
On Sun, 12 Dec 2004, Santiago Vila wrote: > On Sat, 11 Dec 2004, Martin Michlmayr - Debian Project Leader wrote: > > My recollection is that all technical concerns were addressed and that > > the port would go in after the mirror issues will be sorted out (which > > will happen some point after sarge). > > Why after sarge? Nobody knows when sarge will be released. Well, I assume that's because it has something to do with mirrors, and currently the people who could do that are supposed to be fixing the fsck'd sarge autobuilder chains. -- "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot Henrique Holschuh
Re: amd64: ftp-masters questions
On Sun, 2004-12-12 at 00:05 +0100, Santiago Vila wrote: > On Sat, 11 Dec 2004, Martin Michlmayr - Debian Project Leader wrote: > > > My recollection is that all technical concerns were addressed and that > > the port would go in after the mirror issues will be sorted out (which > > will happen some point after sarge). > > Why after sarge? Nobody knows when sarge will be released. Exactly. If Sarge had been released in October or November, that would be one thing, but no one knows when it will be released. Thus, IMO, the AMD64 "gcc-3.4" branch should be moved into Sarge. -- - Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson, LA USA PGP Key ID 8834C06B I prefer encrypted mail. "The United States is not a nation to which peace is a necessity." Grover Cleveland signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: amd64: ftp-masters questions
On Sat, 11 Dec 2004, Martin Michlmayr - Debian Project Leader wrote: > My recollection is that all technical concerns were addressed and that > the port would go in after the mirror issues will be sorted out (which > will happen some point after sarge). Why after sarge? Nobody knows when sarge will be released.
Re: amd64: ftp-masters questions
Martin Michlmayr - Debian Project Leader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > * Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-12-11 15:17]: >> > Is there any progress on this issue? >> >> This seems to be one of your unfrozen mails (1. Aug, huh?). But it is >> still as valid as back then. > > My recollection is that all technical concerns were addressed and that > the port would go in after the mirror issues will be sorted out (which > will happen some point after sarge). > -- > Martin Michlmayr > [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fine. I will take this as official confirmation of what the debian-amd64 team had just suspected so far. Thanks Goswin
Re: amd64: ftp-masters questions
* Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-12-11 15:17]: > > Is there any progress on this issue? > > This seems to be one of your unfrozen mails (1. Aug, huh?). But it is > still as valid as back then. My recollection is that all technical concerns were addressed and that the port would go in after the mirror issues will be sorted out (which will happen some point after sarge). -- Martin Michlmayr [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: amd64: ftp-masters questions
Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > * Martin Michlmayr - Debian Project Leader ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040717 15:55]: >> [AMD64 situation] >> As to the >> technical questions ftpmaster wants to raise, I'm quite disappointed >> that they have not been posted yet because I was promised at DebConf >> that it would happen soon. I've now asked someone I trust to find out >> what these issues are exactly so hopefully progress will be made on >> that soon. > > Is there any progress on this issue? > > > Cheers, > Andi This seems to be one of your unfrozen mails (1. Aug, huh?). But it is still as valid as back then. MfG Goswin
amd64: ftp-masters questions (was: -= PROPOSAL =- Release sarge with amd64)
* Martin Michlmayr - Debian Project Leader ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040717 15:55]: > [AMD64 situation] > As to the > technical questions ftpmaster wants to raise, I'm quite disappointed > that they have not been posted yet because I was promised at DebConf > that it would happen soon. I've now asked someone I trust to find out > what these issues are exactly so hopefully progress will be made on > that soon. Is there any progress on this issue? Cheers, Andi -- http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/ PGP 1024/89FB5CE5 DC F1 85 6D A6 45 9C 0F 3B BE F1 D0 C5 D1 D9 0C
