<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Is Debian still the universal OS?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.aurel32.net/18/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.aurel32.net/18</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 May 2013 17:52:54 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joe Wreschnig</title>
		<link>http://blog.aurel32.net/18#comment-105</link>
		<dc:creator>Joe Wreschnig</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Mar 2005 04:15:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.aurel32.net/?p=18#comment-105</guid>
		<description>&quot;But actually I doubt the number of architectures is the real problem for Sarge. One of the main problems since August... is the testing build daemons.&quot;

So you&#039;re saying coordinating/maintaining buildds for 4 architectures will not be a ton easier than coordinating/maintaining them for 11? Especially when you need 2-3 m68k or MIPS daemons to compare to a single AMD64 one?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;But actually I doubt the number of architectures is the real problem for Sarge. One of the main problems since August&#8230; is the testing build daemons.&#8221;</p>
<p>So you&#8217;re saying coordinating/maintaining buildds for 4 architectures will not be a ton easier than coordinating/maintaining them for 11? Especially when you need 2-3 m68k or MIPS daemons to compare to a single AMD64 one?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
