[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Default ISA/tuning flags for GCC, --enable-kernel= level for glibc



On Mon, 26 Jan 2009, Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-01-26 at 09:39 -0600, Mike McGrath wrote:
> >
> > Ehh, I assure you if we don't change it... Fedora 11 will still ship so it
> > doesn't "have to change".  So someone needs to articulate, very precisely,
> > what benefit investing time into our buildsystem, testing, release
> > upgrading (Fedora is more expensive then RHEL), etc is going to have.
> > Keep in mind we still can't even build epel on our normal buildsystem yet
> > because of $PEOPLE_TIME
> >
> > What benefit will it have to our users?
> >
> > What benefit will it have to our developers?
>
> Mike, some features in our packages are determined at build time
> depending on what kernel you build them on.
> So if the kernel is old enough, you might miss functionality in the
> resulting packages, even more so if that package happens to be glibc I
> think.
>

K, so we have a "might miss functionality".  I think we can be more
specific then that.  I'm not trying to be annoying about this, more
realistic about the changes that have been proposed actually getting in
place.  It's going to have to be a _real_ good reason for the types of
code changes you guys are talking about which is essentially:

"Change koji/mock to create virtual machines on demand" [1]

"change our non-xen builders to become xen"

"Build differently x86/x86_64 then all of the other archs"

"test test test"

I'm not even sure this is a realistic F12 or F13 request as far a timing
goes.

	-Mike

[1] This is epic btw.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]