On Tue, 2005-08-30 at 16:45 -0400, Olivier Crete wrote: > On Tue, 2005-30-08 at 21:40 +0100, Stephen Bennett wrote: > > On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 21:15:18 +0000 > > Luis Medinas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > I belive the worse QA is in x86 and not in AMD64 and MIPS. Between > > > AMD64 and x86 there's a lot of differences i.e. many packages in the > > > tree that needs to be patched to work on AMD64 so we cannot cover > > > AMD64/x86 under the same keyword. > > > > There are packages that will work on (for example) little-endian mips > > but won't work or will need patching to work on big-endian, yet we > > still cover both of those with one keyword. > > You are comparing apples and oranges.. Most of the herd devs only have > x86 and are not able to test amd64. That's the main difference. > Yes you are right but we still need to take special treat for all archs not only for amd64 or x86. With AMD64 we have the resources to make a good QA. With x86 only the maintainers can take care of they own QA.
> Also, x86 is where most of the newbies are, we can't assume that if it > works on amd64 it will also work on x86.. Let me say it again: x86 is > still special.. its not a regular architecture. > Sure every arch is special. But there are archs that needs more work then others i.e. MIPS > That said, I agree, we need an x86 team. Maybe you want to lead it ? > I agree too we need an x86 team. Any Senior Developer wants to take this position ? > -- > Olivier Crête > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Gentoo Developer > x86 Security Liaison > > -- Luis Medinas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://dev.gentoo.org/~metalgod Gentoo Linux Developer: AMD64,Printing,app-cdr -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
