Re: [suse-sparc] Re: [SLE] SuSE Sparc 7.0: stable?

From: Bob Drzyzgula (bob@drzyzgula.org)
Date: Thu Nov 23 2000 - 08:43:24 PST

  • Next message: Chris Wareham: "Re: [suse-sparc] Re: [SLE] SuSE Sparc 7.0: stable?"

    Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2000 11:43:24 -0500
    From: Bob Drzyzgula <bob@drzyzgula.org>
    Message-ID: <20001123114324.F13960@mercury.drzyzgula.org>
    Subject: Re: [suse-sparc] Re: [SLE] SuSE Sparc 7.0: stable?
    

    This does sort of bring up the question, however, about
    SuSE's plans for SPARClinux. Shortly after releasing it, it
    was stated on this mailing list that SuSE's plans for the
    future of this product would "depend on feedback". I'm sort
    of wondering -- what sort of feedback would be required
    for SuSE/SPARC to move ahead? Certainly they can't base
    it on sales. I think that, if someone is going to pick a
    Linux distribution for their SPARC machines, they would
    like to have a reasonable expectation that the product
    will be maintained and extended.

    --Bob

    On Thu, Nov 23, 2000 at 03:37:19PM +0000, Chris Wareham wrote:
    > Lenz Grimmer wrote:
    >
    > >
    > > On Thu, 23 Nov 2000, Fabrizio Poggi wrote:
    > >
    > >> as you know, Red Hat has declared that the Sun Sparc platform will be
    > >> no supported in future and recently SuSE announce the support of Sparc
    > >> architecture in 7.0 release. My SS5 at work run now a 6.2 Red Hat...
    > >
    > > I am sure, the people over in suse-sparc can tell you more about this.
    > >
    >
    > In reply to Fabrizio:
    >
    > RedHat have not dropped support for the SPARC architecture[1]. They
    > didn't see enough of a market to justify a 7.0 release, but a 7.1
    > release for SPARC is likely. The recent updates to the SPARC RawHide...



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.0 : Wed Jun 06 2001 - 11:08:20 PDT