Re: The future of mipsel port
Mark Hymers <[email protected]> Sun, 23 Jul 2023 16:51:13 +0100
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.debian.ports.mips,gmane.linux.debian.devel.general |
|---|---|
| Organization | None at all |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Tue, 18, Jul, 2023 at 12:45:51PM +0800, YunQiang Su spoke thus.. > So I consider to suggest drop mipsel support from the list of official ports. > (And let's keep mips64el port). Is there consensus on this point? If so, should we start making arrangements to remove mipsel from the archive? Thanks, Mark -- Mark Hymers <mhy at debian dot org>
signature.asc
(application/pgp-signature, 833 B)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCAAdFiEEMJkRvqlm0GEwUwRXEbTl/xWw/YIFAmS9THAACgkQEbTl/xWw /YKzWQ//Ukvd736FTVQmpkbsgYM5mBYNAHl8m24EQZ5CslEzlLQQYYEBrRJA6CHf vu1cNGdn85O6SWdfO7gob5hwYpR7Ej9YXgbNUJj1FWRzV3JqECl0Gglq93p5tvjc PHGC7yY3/5QijHP5J/W7YiLiLLJuTnAKVD65jTCPWgfAi/CrbchNxOl5+Mwv4Jng 8kmq1YQ0h5WollaO29M98ckNPG5IViqAGGRTSTHlJu+lj6wnN3jI6wuJsWzFgChy LKanJVO5ai9pQeHFYvuyQ0EsHFuoVG1Qtm54A6qptvvpcMoaoA3Cw6XuJS4yqo2m eHnxFozfBC7X/OycH3LB4f3+0/qs1KivmesV9EeOaqcYx6vYYerylCfbNMwHYyZL gwj6i4ZzNRUg20F+YnDtY64AWzitRtoDJDQJFzMD+UMd4H3r/EdQnNzGGaxWTF7O 1nkPTHtYBX89/ZBqLBuvAJ6FKnsWZOZGODvT3KKCF7feUXIejnTG8akzgaW/9EQU Sg9DH8W9JhA5BhaziipnZ3e5D2VZbjoAO/5+44ooih0bfKTXPc3OWdSiEKBwzSfY ce5GZ+tun1WhgK96rVcklTTAUF4ndhCzq2iQq6moz+6AehVszac7cJoaSB47y5HH Mp64OE1j4sDrXFcvtvHqV5MrtNxEuGnNwb77fncbJhlnvMD+eaM= =SAb/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----