On Tue, 2009-02-17 at 20:42 -0500, Jon Masters wrote: > On Tue, 2009-02-17 at 17:25 -0800, Jesse Keating wrote: > > On Tue, 2009-02-17 at 20:22 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > > > > > > That description of the auto rebuild process makes it sound like the > > > script will take no account of package dependencies, but will just try > > > to rebuild things in a random order. Please tell us it ain't so. > > > > Ordered rebuilds generally only are necessary when bumping sonames or > > otherwise bootstrapping items. Given that neither of those apply for > > this rebuild, effort spent trying to order and chain builds would be > > effort wasted. > > Er...I might not have thought this through enough but the reason I > brought this up on IRC the other day was that I'm not convinced this > won't be equivalent if you're changing the arch and compiler out > underneath. Where will the i586 versions of those packages be to > bootstrap with? And what will happen when something wants a static > library file to link against? So the answer was obvious - apparently we're hoping that the i386 versions will suffice and that there aren't lots of weird build hacks around. Jon. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
