Kevin Kofler wrote: > Joachim wrote: >> I do not understand then, that there exist i686 packages which have >> higher requirements. > > Those packages need to be fixed. > > I know there are some audio production packages which are building with SSE > enabled (and required, those packages don't do runtime detection), IIRC in > both Fedora and RPM Fusion, in blatant violation of the guidelines, and the > packager(s) refuse(s) to fix this (they even do it intentionally for new > packages, despite my objections in the reviews). If I'm not mistaken, most > of the offenders are owned by oget (Orcan Ogetbil), but if I were you, I'd > check all the audio production packages. > >> Look at the ATLAS library for which I had filed a bug because only >> SSE/SSE2/SSE3 variants are provided > > This one needs to get fixed too, of course. > > I've looked at how Debian is handling this, but they're stuck at an old > version (3.6.0), maybe exactly because of this issue. :-( > > We need to provide "architectural defaults" for plain i686, even crappy > ones, they just need to work at all. I think there's a valid case for making an exception to this: when a package is an accelerated version of a particular library. That is, when the basic functionality of a library is available in a i686 Fedora package, but a special SSEx version of the library makes use of faster instructions. Andrew. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
