Rebuild exisitng errata for x86_64?

[Jesse Keating]

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
released errata for x86_64, for releases that have x86_64 (FC1,2,3).
This could be a lot of work, and I'm concerned about the difference in
build systems.  Releasing x86_64 versions of packages built with a
different build system than that which produced the i386 versions just
doesn't sit well with me.  Then again, neither does rebuilding EVERY
errata on the new build system and re-releasing all the packages.

So I guess the bottom line question is, is there a significant amount of
users in the community that need these older FC's updates built for
x86_64, would be willing to do some basic QA on them, and would be
willing to accept packages built on a different build system?  Or should
we just continue from this point forward with just FC3+ supporting
x86_64?  (and set policy for if/when we get support for ppc packages)

I welcome your input.

-- 
Jesse Keating RHCE      (geek.j2solutions.net)
Fedora Legacy Team      (www.fedoralegacy.org)
GPG Public Key          (geek.j2solutions.net/jkeating.j2solutions.pub)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 191 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-legacy-list/attachments/20060303/700b2277/attachment.sig>