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

Re: [fedora-virt] qemu/kvm status



On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 01:46:49PM +0000, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-02-13 at 10:59 -0200, Glauber Costa wrote:
> 
> > The idea is that you can have your package built on an architecture
> > exclusively with BuildArch directive. But your package can then have
> > a subpackage with BuildArch: noarch. That way, your package will span
> > all repositories. This seems like the perfect solution to us.
> 
> Yep, that would be ideal ... as long as people don't take to throw
> things at us for shipping arch specific binaries in a noarch package :-)
> 
> Seriously, it sounds like it should work really well.
> 
> >  I've
> > helped them to proceed with some tests, and it seem to work. So what
> > I'm plannin on doing, is post the rpms for review today, since it is
> > unlikely that they will receive more updates in this mean time.
> > 
> > Getting them review and approved is the really important bits. We can
> > set on the ideal solution a bit later.
> 
> Yep, agree.

Please people:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485417
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485418
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485420

You can help me out in this enterprise by reviewing the aforementioned
BZs.


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