Re: F42 Change Proposal: Optimized Binaries for the AMD64 / x86_64 Architecture (v2) (self-contained)

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

 



On Sun, Jan 12, 2025 at 4:36 PM Chris Adams <linux@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Once upon a time, Neal Gompa <ngompa13@xxxxxxxxx> said:
> > For stuff installed into /usr, we
> > should just allow packages to be optionally built with the higher
> > microarchitecture level in addition to the base one and allow DNF to
> > sort and prefer packages accordingly.
>
> Is this not just resurrecting the old i386/i586/i686 RPM handling?  Is
> there a reason not to do it the same way again?

Not that I know of. The logic is also already kind of there. The
x86_64 arch levels are supported as distinct architectures in RPM with
compatibility detection. openSUSE is already using this facility.



-- 
真実はいつも一つ!/ Always, there's only one truth!
-- 
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Users]     [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