I cannot speak to how widespread it has been adopted, but the linux
(kernel) package for version 4.17.17 has been successfully built and
installed for ia64 under Debian ports. There is clearly more work to
do to get ia64 rehabilitated, but there are over 10,000 packages
currently successfully
I cannot speak to how widespread it has been adopted, but the linux
(kernel) package for version 4.17.17 has been successfully built and
installed for ia64 under Debian ports. There is clearly more work to
do to get ia64 rehabilitated, but there are over 10,000 packages
currently successfully
On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 01:57:08AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 09:47:01AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > sh is trivial, arm seems doable, with a bit of luck we can do 'rm -rf
> > arch/ia64' leaving us with s390.
>
> Is removing ia64 a serious plan?
I 'joked' about
On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 01:57:08AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 09:47:01AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > sh is trivial, arm seems doable, with a bit of luck we can do 'rm -rf
> > arch/ia64' leaving us with s390.
>
> Is removing ia64 a serious plan?
I 'joked' about
On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 09:47:01AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> sh is trivial, arm seems doable, with a bit of luck we can do 'rm -rf
> arch/ia64' leaving us with s390.
Is removing ia64 a serious plan? It is the cause for a fair share of
oddities in dma lang, and I did not have much luck
On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 09:47:01AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> sh is trivial, arm seems doable, with a bit of luck we can do 'rm -rf
> arch/ia64' leaving us with s390.
Is removing ia64 a serious plan? It is the cause for a fair share of
oddities in dma lang, and I did not have much luck
6 matches
Mail list logo
