On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 09:20:26AM -0500, seth vidal wrote: >On Fri, 2009-02-20 at 14:12 +0000, Paul Howarth wrote: >> seth vidal wrote: >> > On Fri, 2009-02-20 at 09:42 +0000, Paul Howarth wrote: >> >> Now that Fedora 11 x86_32 is going to be based on i586 packages rather >> >> than i386 packages, does it follow that yum's $basearch will change from >> >> i386 to i586 and hence repository directory layouts changing too, or >> >> will it stay at i386? >> >> >> > >> > I don't think it will change. For a few reasons: >> > >> > 1. non-fedora repos >> > 2. non-fedora distros >> > 3. this is why we also have $arch in addition to $basearch >> > >> > make sense? >> >> Certainly from the point of view of being the least disruptive option; >> it'll just look a bit strange having i386 "Everything" repos with no >> i386 packages in them... > >Which is why we shouldn't have i386 repos. We should switch >fedora-release to using $arch and an i586 repo which is a symlink to the >i686 repo. Then when we phase out i586 in F12, we just remove the i586 >symlink. That way, if anyone wants to maintain a build of fedora for >i586 or lesser machines then they can do so in the i586 path using >$arch. Or you could just have: x86 x86_64 ppc ppc64 sparc sparc64 etc. Naming repos after specific arches just seems like pain. This is one area where ppc does things right. You don't see things like: 604e 75xx for ppc32, or: 970 power3 power4 power5 for ppc64. I'll probably get the "tradition" and "you don't know what you're talking about" arguments thrown at me. My opinions won't change :). josh -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
