Re: i686 as secondary arch?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 07/05/2016 03:36 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Tue, Jul 05, 2016 at 12:56:37PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
On 07/05/2016 10:57 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:

If you need to run an i686 virtual machine based on Rawhide, my
experience is that it's more likely than not that it won't boot, and
no one cares.

Well, that's independent for the state as primary vs secondary architecture.

If we remove i686 as a primary architecture, we will not have i686
packages in the x86_64 repository.  Is this what we want?

IMHO that would be bad.

Okay, so we should keep building i686 within the same Koji instance (otherwise we'll have a lot of unnecessary pain). For me, this is the dominant aspect of what constitutes a primary architecture.

Whether we need to provide installation images is a different question.

Florian
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]
  Powered by Linux