Brendan Conoboy (blc@xxxxxxxxxx) said: > On 07/15/2013 11:09 AM, Bill Nottingham wrote: > >If I'm understanding you, you would prefer that ARM be blessed with the > >stamp of being a 'primary' arch at the cost of dropping release targets, > >images, and featuresets that are made by and for the community now. > > I wouldn't put it like that. The ARM team isn't asking for a > blessing, we're asking to have builds that block ARM also block x86. > At a technical level, that is a fundamental part of what being > primary is. Yes, there are other aspects, both practical (what is > released) and philosophical (What is Fedora). It's the next logical > step. If not now, when? When libGL is ready to go? ... when someone fixes it? > >I don't think I can support that - it seems awfully unfriendly to the > >community that exists now. > > You are proceeding from a misconception: This is a thought exercise- > If ARM devices didn't have graphics would it still be essential for > PA promotion that libGL for ARM work and be accelerated? There is > no proposal to throw out the baby or the bathwater. This is about > defining the threshold at which point armv7hl gets built along side > i686 and x86_64. And I'm saying that threshold should be that the major libraries work. That includes libGL. After all, IT WORKS ON S390. This is not a high bar, and I wouldn't consider it a requirement for that arch. Sure, the hardware you care about doesn't include graphics. But the hardware the community cares about does. Bill -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
