On Sat, 2006-03-04 at 01:58 -0600, Eric Rostetter wrote:
> In any case, I think we should _at least_ release all FC3 packages
> for x86_64. In other words, we shouldn't release new FC3 x86_64
> without releasing also the older FC3 x86_64, for consistency.
So far, all FC3 updates have had x86_64 p
Quoting Jesse Keating <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
packages, but the question remains, do we want to rebuild all previously
released errata for x86_64, for releases that have x86_64 (FC1,2,3).
Yes, if possible, but this is something to be done "in the background,
at lower priority, as time permits."
On Sat, 2006-03-04 at 11:08 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> I dont think legacy is going to be using the build system as much as
> core and extras. It might be better to use a common pool of build
> systems separated by access time or build cycles rather than a physical
> allocation of individual
Jesse Keating wrote:
On Sat, 2006-03-04 at 10:51 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
The way I see it, Fedora Extras and Core already have access to PPC
systems and Legacy is meanwhile waiting for hardware donations. If we
share the infrastructure and we are well integrated, that shouldnt be
happ
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> Jesse Keating
> Sent: Friday, March 03, 2006 10:21 PM
> To: fedora-legacy-list@redhat.com
> Subject: Rebuild exisitng errata for x86_64?
> So I guess the bottom line question is, is there a
> sign
On Sat, 2006-03-04 at 10:51 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> The way I see it, Fedora Extras and Core already have access to PPC
> systems and Legacy is meanwhile waiting for hardware donations. If we
> share the infrastructure and we are well integrated, that shouldnt be
> happening. This is not
Jesse Keating wrote:
On Sat, 2006-03-04 at 10:26 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Thats strange. How does RHL content affect the ability of Fedora Legacy
to use Fedora Extras buildsystems?. I didnt see any public discussion
happening on this and we definitely need the details spelled out more
On Sat, 2006-03-04 at 10:26 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Thats strange. How does RHL content affect the ability of Fedora Legacy
> to use Fedora Extras buildsystems?. I didnt see any public discussion
> happening on this and we definitely need the details spelled out more
> precisely.
Again,
Jesse Keating wrote:
On Sat, 2006-03-04 at 10:06 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
So perhaps an obvious question is could Red Hat internal build systems
used by Fedora Core or the ones used for Fedora Extras be spared a few
cycles for Fedora legacy on x86_64/PPC or do you want to keep the
inf
On Sat, 2006-03-04 at 10:06 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> So perhaps an obvious question is could Red Hat internal build systems
> used by Fedora Core or the ones used for Fedora Extras be spared a few
> cycles for Fedora legacy on x86_64/PPC or do you want to keep the
> infrastructure indepen
Jesse Keating wrote:
So with the new build software that we're having good success with we
can produce x86_64 packages (and with future hardware donations ppc
packages too). We've been spinning all FC3 updates with x86_64
packages, but the question remains, do we want to rebuild all previously
11 matches
Mail list logo
