On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 09:48:45AM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > On Sat, 2008-01-12 at 18:47:53 +0100, Roland Stigge wrote: > > Again, I don't agree here (backed by p2): The package is wrong if it > > asserts that it's "Architecture: all". It contains powerpc specific > > stuff and can only be built on (i.e. for) that architecture. Therefore, > > it should be "Architecture: powerpc". > > Yes, ideally, to be pedantically correct, we would either have > powerpc (or other) cross-toolchains on the archive,
At the first [1] glance, it appears that all of these packages are happy with nothing but gcc/binutils, so bare-bones crosschains wouldn't take too much space. > or we'd have > Multiarch support and the package could be arch:powerpc and would be > possible to install on other arches. But this is not possible right > now, so consider this wontfix. Also, it would be great if we had packaged kernels (even minimal) for all arches. Without them, tools like qemubuilder take a long session of hunting for docs and files to set up. A static kernel without useless drivers takes 1-2MB, that's a low price for the convenience. [1]. A _brief_ glance, so don't shoot me if I missed something big. -- 1KB // Microsoft corollary to Hanlon's razor: // Never attribute to stupidity what can be // adequately explained by malice. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]