[Debian-ppc64-devel] Re: Bug#263743: Call For Help - Please support the ppc64 architecture

[sean finney]

--HlL+5n6rz5pIUxbD
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 10:24:04PM +0000, Scott James Remnant wrote:
> Because it's a 64-bit version of an already supported architecture.
> Having "ppc" and "ppc64" would be fine, as would having "powerpc" and
> "powerpc64".  Having "powerpc" and "ppc64" is inconsistent.

and deviating from an already established standard isn't?  i'm wondering
what the actual benefits of having a similarly (powerpc/powerpc64)
named port are, apart from being aesthetically pleasing.


	sean


--=20

--HlL+5n6rz5pIUxbD
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFCOLdkynjLPm522B0RAlz/AJ9rBeZi4tkzIovx3W6rgX7epdGJtwCgikXT
v0tJuNXezGIPeg+Ai6UsJ2I=
=WdAn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--HlL+5n6rz5pIUxbD--