Re: Re: .amd64 packages

Thomas Backlund wrote:
> That's AFAIK because Gwenole hasn't yet had much time to do anything 
> about the x86_64 cooker contrib...
> 
> or he may havee some of it already done, but not synced it to
> the mirrors yet...
> 
> IIRC he said he will be rebuid / clean it completely for 10.2
May I remind that some contributers also proposed to do the job, and 
even stated to do it, but were quickly rebuffed by difficulties to 
access up-to-date packages first, and lack of consideration for their 
work second (aka: do what you want, your packages will be silently 
erased at the end) ?

-- 
If a circuit requires n components, then there will be only n - 1 
components in locally-held stocks.
	-- Murphy's Hardware Laws n°5