[Debian-ppc64-devel] is this port alife?

[Andreas Jochens]

On 05-Nov-04 10:03, Sven Luther wrote:
> The real problem is that you refuse to play nicely with the rest of the
> powerpc/powerpc64 debian porters, and insist of going your own way. I believe

Sven, please stop these accusations. I am just trying to 
create and maintain a native ppc64 port because I like the idea
of having a clean 64-bit environment. What is so bad about that?

I posted patches for the native ppc64 port to the Debian BTS where
they where discussed publicly. Most of the patches were accepted
by the respective packages maintainers. Generally, the package 
maintainers were very helpful and tried to make their package work
for the ppc64 port like for any other port.

Up to now you are the only package maintainer who refuses to
make his packages work for ppc64. I understand that you are using 
your position as a package maintainer to actively prevent the 
creation of a native ppc64 port for Debian. 

I cannot do anything about that besides using a patched package version 
for the native ppc64 archive. However, I hope that you consider to 
change your mind and let me try to complete the native ppc64 port
while you try to find a different way to support 64-bit applications
on ppc64 hardware in Debian. Let's see which approach works better.

> that 64bit binaries have an interest either in the case of a partial
> multi-arch archive, or as biarch 64bit libraries, but you clearly said you are
> interested in none of the above.

I firmly believe that those two approaches (the creation of a _partial_ 
multiarch archive and the biarch library approach) will both fail. 
People have tried to set up things like that for other architectures 
without any success so far. Multiarch may work in the end, but a 
full native 64-bit port will be necessary to build the 64-bit packages 
for multiarch installations.

Regards
Andreas Jochens