On 2014-06-11 09:49, Andrew Haley wrote:
On 10/06/14 19:28, Matthew Garrett wrote:
Fedora is supposed to provide a consistent experience across primary
architectures. Having a subset of our packages fail to build on ARM
means that's not true, and the current state of affairs clearly
violates
point 8 of the architecture promotion requirements.
Fedora includes a lot of packages, some of which are not of mainstream
interest. Because of this lack of interest in their packages, some
upstream maintainers haven't ported to ARM. Some upstream packages
may not even still be actively maintained.
How can we fix this?
We have to look at this on a case-by-case basis. We might have to ask
if a package really is relevant to a general-purpose operating system.
[Some packages may have been abandoned upstream. So, they will never
be ported to ARM.]
Let's look at Bug 1004357 - root no available on ARM due to cint.
The upstream maintainers say:
We will not implement vararg support for that platform in ROOT
5. It's not trivial and we have to spend our time getting ROOT 6
baked. Thanks for your understanding!
So, what should we do? Should we block Fedora from running on ARM
because of the lack of upstream support for the ROOT numerical data
analysis framework? No! That would be ridiculous. It would mean
that Fedora on the ARM target is held hostage by this package.
Special-purpose packages are all well and good, but Fedora on ARM is
(IMHO, YMMV) far more important than those packages.
This is a fair point, but perhaps that calls for a separation between
core packages and optional packages, similar to EL and EPEL.
Gordan
_______________________________________________
arm mailing list
arm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/arm
