On Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 11:27:00AM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On Thu, 2007-04-26 at 11:21 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 09:56:33AM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote: > > > On Thu, 2007-04-26 at 10:24 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote: > > > > On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 10:03:00PM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote: > > > > > > > > [... Changing all specfiles by splitting out bin subpackages > > > > > > > > vs simply defining a new _bindir ...] > > > > > > > Yes, but it does involve much more work to do. > > > > > > > > > > Packaging is hard. Let's go shopping. > > > > > > > > No, the above is not hard to do, it is a straightforward thing to do > > > > that will occupy a full or more than one release cycle(s). > > > > > > > > I prefer to get F8 with some new features as well and not only a mass > > > > review again. Which wil involve thre times as many packages as the FC > > > > merge review which we didn't manage to finish. > > > > > > Actually, this one should be quite easy to automate. > > > > > > We've spent too long trying to take short-cuts and do the easiest thing > > > in the _short_ term for multilib -- and it shows. It's time to start > > > doing it properly, IMHBCO. > > > > Exactly and the proper thing for multilib is: Let it die, multiarch rulez! > > Apparently you haven't understood what multilibs are. Obviously your personal definition of multilib includes cross-compiling for x86_64 on i386. But we call multilib something else here, please adjust. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgpjrx3zGaihB.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- 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
