On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 12:50 PM, Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > But that was stuff where there either wasn't source or there was no > clear chain from the source to the binary. > > Please be clear that the MinGW cross-compiler is 100% free software > built from source. If it turns out that any parts aren't, then they > will be removed. Sorry, I didn't mean to confuse the issue. I think Toshio is saying better what I am trying to say. There is a difference between cross-compiling code that is inherently arch-adependent in how its compiled and writing code in a language that is meant to be managed by a arch-independent virtual machine layer. I have a very difficult time seeing wine as similar to any virtual machine based language such as mono unless wine can be built and run on multiple arches. So as such I would have a very hard time seeing any code be branded as Fedora that had to be run under wine to be useful at all. I'm okay with optionally building a varient that runs under wine as part of the Fedora project if and only if there is a native version of that code already available for Fedora Linux. if wine as a project gets to the point where it can usefully run on ppc, then i would feel a lot better letting application code inside Fedora need it. But I'd still want to have it as a side-repo. -jef -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
