Re: armel not to be released anymore? (was: armel/marvell kernel size)

[Paul Wise]

On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 3:21 AM, W. Martin Borgert wrote:
> Quoting Ben Hutchings:
>>
>> Still, as armel will not be a release architecture any more, I suppose
>> it can diverge further from the normal configuration.
>
> I didn't know, that this already has been decided.
> Could you point to the emails about this? Thanks!

https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/20180207184636.ukfil2kybr7jc...@betterave.cristau.org
https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/20170914024001.kitowt4moob5h...@tack.einval.com

-- 
bye,
pabs

https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise

armel not to be released anymore? (was: armel/marvell kernel size)

[W. Martin Borgert]

Quoting Ben Hutchings :

Still, as armel will not be a release architecture any more, I suppose
it can diverge further from the normal configuration.


I didn't know, that this already has been decided.
Could you point to the emails about this? Thanks!

Re: armel not to be released anymore? (was: armel/marvell kernel size)

[Ben Hutchings]

On Tue, 2018-03-27 at 21:21 +0200, W. Martin Borgert wrote:
> Quoting Ben Hutchings :
> > Still, as armel will not be a release architecture any more, I
> > suppose
> > it can diverge further from the normal configuration.
> 
> I didn't know, that this already has been decided.
> Could you point to the emails about this? Thanks!

I don't know about emails, but the status page says it is not a
candidate: https://release.debian.org/buster/arch_qualify.html

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings
For every complex problem
there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part