On Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 02:19:54PM +1000, Michael Anthon wrote: > OK, bad pun, sorry 8^) > > Over the weekend I installed the latest unstable stuff onto an E250 that we > had sitting here doing bugger all apart from keeping the room warm. I even > managed to compile myself a SMP kernel for it (2.2.14).
Excellent. > I have noticed that there seems to be a few missing packages in the graphics > libs area and I was wondering if this is because of > a) a lack of build resources > b) a lack of human resources to do any of the required tweaking to make > these work on sparc. > > If it is due to a lack of build resources, I can make this machine available > to build some packages if it would help. Right now woody for sparc is a really bad choice. I suggest staying with potato[1]. The reason being that a lot is going into getting the release out the door right now. This isn't a lack of resources or man power, per se, since I could easily start up a build daemon for unstable one quite a few of the ultrasparc's we have at our disposal. It's more of prorities. [1]: Last I checked there were ~280 packages for woody-sparc that were either out-of-date, or uncompiled, while potato is 99.95% synced (saving one program, clisp, which we cannot seem to get fixed on sparc). BTW, what graphics packages are you missing? I don't think there are any available for i386 that are not also available for sparc (except the glide stuff, but that isn't sparc's fault, it's the asm). Ben -- -----------=======-=-======-=========-----------=====------------=-=------ / Ben Collins -- ...on that fantastic voyage... -- Debian GNU/Linux \ ` [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ' `---=========------=======-------------=-=-----=-===-======-------=--=---'
