On Wed, 2005-08-31 at 09:18 -0400, Stephen P. Becker wrote:
Notice that for almost
everything, amd64 is barely behind x86...just a minor version
number/revision or two at most.
That's the ATs hard at work keeping us current ;)
--
Homer Parker
Gentoo/AMD64 Arch Tester Strategic Lead
On Wed, 31 Aug 2005 05:36:52 -0700 Duncan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| No offense intended, but as a user, I /like/ to actually know that a
| package keyworded for my arch (segment) is known to work on it in full
| (IMHO) uncrippled amd64 form, not in some (IMHO) crippled 32-bit
| special case. If
Stephen P. Becker wrote: [Wed Aug 31 2005, 08:18:53AM CDT]
We don't live with that problem on MIPS because it doesn't exist. If
something doesn't work in one spot, we dont' stable keyword it...simple
as that. Also keep in mind that for some stuff, we don't have to test
on both. For
On Wed, 2005-08-31 at 16:32 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
It's not magic. We've been handling packages that work on sparc64 but
not sparc32 for years with a single keyword. Just because you (and,
from the looks of things, most of the x86 and amd64 developers) don't
know about some of portage's
