On Thursday, November 21, 2019 1:59:59 AM MST Vít Ondruch wrote:
> You might not know, but asciidoc package is more or less dead upstream
> AFAIK. So far we keep it on life support, because this was easier to do
> so. But in alternative reality, it could also be that the result of such
> work
Dne 20. 11. 19 v 22:00 John M. Harris Jr napsal(a):
> On Wednesday, November 20, 2019 2:19:22 AM MST Vít Ondruch wrote:
>> Dne 20. 11. 19 v 0:52 John M. Harris Jr napsal(a):
>>
>>>
-- trimming functionality and/or moving functionality to sub-packages
or separate package.
>>> For what
On Wednesday, November 20, 2019 2:19:22 AM MST Vít Ondruch wrote:
> Dne 20. 11. 19 v 0:52 John M. Harris Jr napsal(a):
>
> >
> >
> >> -- trimming functionality and/or moving functionality to sub-packages
> >> or separate package.
> >
> > For what purpose? Can you provide an example of a package
Dne 20. 11. 19 v 0:52 John M. Harris Jr napsal(a):
>
>> -- trimming functionality and/or moving functionality to sub-packages
>> or separate package.
> For what purpose? Can you provide an example of a package which would benefit
> from this, that does not already do something similar?
>
For
On Monday, October 28, 2019 12:59:07 PM MST Troy Dawson wrote:
> Smoother initial creation of RHEL 9.[5]
I hope this is already clear, but what is good for RHEL is not necessarily
good for Fedora. If it would do good here too, that's excellent. If not, that
will be something that needs to get
Dne 28. 10. 19 v 20:59 Troy Dawson napsal(a):
> [3] - The core buildroot is the packages in @buildsys-build, and
> everything needed to build those packages.
[4] - self-hosting is the ability to build all the packages on themselves.
Why?
Why, this needs to be self-hosting? Do we really
On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 8:00 PM Troy Dawson wrote:
>
> I would like to introduce a plan I call Square 1 [1][2]
>
> There are two goals to Square 1.
> The first is to get, and keep, the core buildroot[3] packages,
> self-hosting[4].
> The second is to get the list of core buildroot packages as
I have, and that works fairly well. Although I haven't tried it since F29.
I was hoping to have something that works with dnf, and can even be
part of an rpm, so others can easily use it.
There are some drawbacks to using regular dnf, especially the
multi-arch. By the time you get all the source
Have you tried using https://github.com/fedora-modularity/depchase?
That basically does what you are doing and with some small changes it
can perform much more things.
On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 3:27 PM Troy Dawson wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 2:58 PM Peter Robinson wrote:
> >
> > On Mon,
On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 2:58 PM Peter Robinson wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 8:00 PM Troy Dawson wrote:
> >
> > I would like to introduce a plan I call Square 1 [1][2]
> >
> > There are two goals to Square 1.
> > The first is to get, and keep, the core buildroot[3] packages,
> >
On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 8:00 PM Troy Dawson wrote:
>
> I would like to introduce a plan I call Square 1 [1][2]
>
> There are two goals to Square 1.
> The first is to get, and keep, the core buildroot[3] packages,
> self-hosting[4].
> The second is to get the list of core buildroot packages as
I would like to introduce a plan I call Square 1 [1][2]
There are two goals to Square 1.
The first is to get, and keep, the core buildroot[3] packages, self-hosting[4].
The second is to get the list of core buildroot packages as small as possible.
What are the benefits to Square 1?
More stable
12 matches
Mail list logo
