On Sun, 2007-03-18 at 10:32 -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote: > Once upon a time Sunday 18 March 2007, David Woodhouse wrote: > > On Thu, 2007-03-15 at 10:57 -0400, Jesse Keating wrote: > > > > And so we need to queue rebuilds for all of our packages? > > > > > > I'm not sure on that one. If we can manage to build what we have already > > > built just for ppc64 without any bumps, that would be nice. > > > > We've never bothered shipping 64-bit versions of Extras packages before > > -- unless you suddenly find an overriding reason to do so, I don't see > > any reason to rebuild for F7 just to add a 64-bit binary package which > > we don't need to ship anyway. > > David do you still want ppc64 support? if so it needs built. we dont have > any way to say build this package ppc64 and this one not. Its all or > nothing. I wasn't talking about the configuration of the build system -- I was responding to the question of whether we need to queue rebuilds for all packages just to make ppc64 versions of them. > there is no more extras there is only Fedora. Im just as happy to say you get > no more ppc64 kernel glibc etc which will be the outcome if we dont do this The kernel and glibc are already built for ppc64. There is no need to queue a rebuild just to get ppc64 versions of those. Everything we want to ship for ppc64 is already built, surely? Except perhaps blt :) -- dwmw2 -- Fedora-maintainers mailing list Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers -- Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly
