On Tue, 2006-04-04 at 22:25 -0400, Paul Nasrat wrote: > I assume for the weekly snapshots of rawhide that you'll be putting > unique (eg date based) names on the isos so they can be readily > identified, else you're going to run into trouble tracking issues > across media sets. To be honest, I'm not convinced that weekly ISO builds are particularly useful -- we don't do that for rawhide on other architectures either. It's probably better just to encourage people to use rsync to keep up with rawhide, rather than downloading it all over again each week. > Do these isos correspond with FC5 or a random snapshot? Rawhide for about a week leading up to March 20th was identical to FC5 in all but the 'fedora-release' package. If making an IA64 'FC5' I'd be inclined to replace the fedora-release package too. In fact, you almost certainly want to do that anyway, since you'll be publishing the errata, and fedora-release contains the yum configuration. Aside from the updates, the next task is building Extras and Livna for IA64, of course... -- dwmw2 -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
