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

Re: For your consideration: Secondary Architectures in Fedora



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 05/30/2007 11:30 AM, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-05-30 at 10:07 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
>> On Tue, 2007-05-29 at 16:00 -0700, Chris Weyl wrote:
>>> In other words, by only failing a build when a primary arch fails, we
>>> enable the inclusion of many other architectures for those who care
>>> about them, without imposing additional burdens on all maintainers
>>> (who may not care about them).
>> We have that already. The existing policy, allowing ExcludeArch but
>> requiring a bug to be filed, works extremely well.
> 
> 	As Jakub pointed out, there is a burden - having to wait for the slower
> arches to complete a build. I was under the impression that that was one
> of the main things that secondary arches was intended to fix.
> 
> 	Couldn't we have automatic ExcludeArch bug filing when a build fails on
> a secondary arch?

Technically speaking, of course, everything is possible, but I don't
think this is a good idea. Packages do fail on Alpha or PowerPC or Sparc
and sometimes it's easy to fix; Sometimes not, we (*human*) need to
decide if it's OK to exclude, because there are no other packages
depending on this, or if we need to fix it, because we cannot build a
bunch of other packages.

- -of
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGXUhXxWN5Ge8lKUMRAs8MAJ9OO0ZDsgbSQ7a64Sa2PjZh3KGGIgCgkkBn
YIc9eDvgSnI++JihslWmFHU=
=QD0/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


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