[I386-uclibc-devel] Re: question on hurd-i386 Debian architecture

[Pjotr Kourzanov]

Riku Voipio wrote:

>On Mon, Mar 13, 2006 at 10:38:52AM +0100, Pjotr Kourzanov wrote:
>  
>
>>Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>Not being a dpkg maintainer, I find this to be a gratuitous change for
>>>no good reason (other than "it looks a bit better"). I don't see what
>>>point it would serve.
>>>      
>>>
>
>  
>
>>Maybe the ability to run Debian on embedded or old systems?
>>AFAIK, there is currently no support for running Debian with uclibc...
>>    
>>
>
>Wouter is referring to the naming change. Indeed I agree, changing
>naming conventions is troublesome, and discussions about what naming
>convention "looks good" are endless. Essentially it's a 
>"color of the bikeshed" [1] issue.
>  
>
Yes, we whould not change names of existing archs. However,
for new ones, we better choose suitable names.

>As for debian with uClibc, there is SLIND[2] which uses 
>uclibc-i386 / uclibc-arm/ uclibc-powerpc and i386-uclibc[3] alioth
>project, which is quite staganant ATM and hasn't selected arch name yet.
>
>[1] http://www.unixguide.net/freebsd/faq/16.19.shtml
>[2] http://www.emdebian.org/slind.html
>  
>

This one looks dead.

>[3] http://alioth.debian.org/projects/i386-uclibc/
>  
>
There were no updates to this one since october. Is it still alive?