On Mon, 27 Jun 2016 10:48:15 +0100 Dave Love <d.l...@liverpool.ac.uk> wrote:
> Kevin Fenzi <kevin-+bl/7iugrmuavxtiumw...@public.gmane.org> writes: > > I don't know (I work for Red Hat, but am not directly involved with > > internal builds), but I am highly skeptical of the claim. > > Likewise (currently). > > > That said, why not ask whoever wrote that doc for some kind of > > citation or proof? They say something about testing, so perhaps they > > have some proof of this? > > It was deduced experimentally during early -- for some value of early > -- CentOS development. I'll suggest the reference to Red Hat is > changed. > > It could be important to know if it was correct now, which was a > reason for asking here. I assume that rebuilds are essentially the > same as RHEL (modulo reproducible builds) when it comes to things > like reporting bugs and issues relevant to EPEL development. > Specifically I assume they won't potentially have different code > generation bugs. I would assume that to be correct yes, although I suppose you could ask on centos-devel or the like to get their take. kevin
pgpyFGS8gvZ1M.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ epel-devel mailing list epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
