https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901665
Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |CLOSED
Resolution|-
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901665
--- Comment #13 from Raphael Groner ---
Well, there's now also box64 for emulation with 64 bits but both box86 (with 32
bits) and box64 are incompatible. Someone should create another request for
box64.
--
You are receiving this mail becaus
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901665
--- Comment #12 from soredake ---
Any progress on this?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901665
Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|needinfo?(kwiz...@gmail.com |
|)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901665
Raphael Groner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||needinfo?(kwiz...@gmail.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901665
--- Comment #9 from Raphael Groner ---
Propably answers at (virtual) FOSDEM stand:
https://stands.fosdem.org/stands/box86/main/
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about change
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901665
--- Comment #8 from Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) ---
(In reply to Raphael Groner from comment #7)
> Official support for emulation of x86 (32 bits) only is poor but more than
> nothing. What about aarch64 then?
Aarch64 been a 64bit architecture,
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901665
--- Comment #7 from Raphael Groner ---
Official support for emulation of x86 (32 bits) only is poor but more than
nothing. What about aarch64 then?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always n
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901665
--- Comment #6 from Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) ---
(In reply to Raphael Groner from comment #5)
> > This package is known to only work on arm.
>
> Though, I'd try to build on all possible architectures anyways
This is the package description:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901665
--- Comment #5 from Raphael Groner ---
> This package is known to only work on arm.
Though, I'd try to build on all possible architectures anyways without caring
about usefulness. Fedora policy suggests to hardly try to avoid any excluded
arc
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901665
Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|needinfo?(kwiz...@gmail.com |
|)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901665
Andy Mender changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||needinfo?(kwiz...@gmail.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901665
--- Comment #2 from Raphael Groner ---
*** Bug 1800429 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901665
--- Comment #1 from Andy Mender ---
First, big thanks for bringing this package to Fedora! :)
> %check
> # Tests are failing for now
> %ctest || :
Any indication why they are failing? Could you add an extra comment explaining
that?
> %files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901665
Andy Mender changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901665
Raphael Groner changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||projects...@smart.ms
Doc Typ
16 matches
Mail list logo
