-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Jeff Garzik wrote:
I would rather the problem be approached in a logical,
by distributing the workload across the package maintainers
firsthand knowledge. ie. how things worked before.
hardware isn't exactly common these days. I'm sure there are
a few machines on campus that have PPC (there are definitely
SPARC workstations sprinkled around). As it stands, I have no
useful access to any of the machines (I guess a Live CD could
get some special access, though at what cost to my status as a
student, I don't know).
But you're dodging the larger point -- Fedora has, de facto,
endian support in its entirety to a second-hand effort, rather
distributed the workload much more widely. Given M package
and N secondary-platform volunteers, it is clear M > N by
Given that ppc32 and ppc64 (or pick your BE platform) have
an ability to detect problems not found on LE, it seems like
change will directly lead to missed bugs, and an attendent
Was ppc really such a burden?
Build times were the worst part of it IMO. With how it was set
up (ppc being default even on ppc64) ppc64 could have been
dropped and ppc be left intact.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----