On Wednesday 06 June 2007 13:30:04 Paul Wouters wrote: > Just a small note. As I was trying to compose my own set of packages, > and (obviously) doing something wrong, I noticed that pungi somehow, > somewhere, decided to use my system's yum, instead of through the config > file specified with -c. I know, because my own system includes Livna, > while my /etc/pungi/ has no mention of livna whatsover (and I don't > want/need it on my own spin) That may be a bug in yum, or in the way that I'm using yum. I need to work with Seth on that... > So for testing I created /etc/pungi/f7-fedora-minimal.i386, using the > minimal.manifest and overnight that did successfully build the entire > tree including ISO images. I haven't had time to debug my own package > set configuration yet, I am picking that up later today. > > Revisor looks like an interesting tool, though it adds another laywer > of confusion by using/needing its own pungi files, and comes with a > disclaimer that you can only build for the arch that you are currently > running (unfortunately, I am running x86_64 and need to build an i386 > iso). I am not sure why this requirement is in revisor. Pungi has that requirement too. However with mock and setarch you can get around that. The requirement is actually on the anaconda tools that reviser asks pungi to run, as those need to be ran on the arch you are composing. -- Jesse Keating Release Engineer: Fedora
Attachment:
pgpeFXfDXQJte.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
