kernel-source vs. kernel-sourcecode (please revert)
Dax Kelson
dax at gurulabs.com
Tue Jun 15 17:05:11 UTC 2004
On Tue, 2004-06-15 at 16:04 +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> The kernel-source package became noarch. This had a LOT of advantages,
> including cleanups, saves a TON of diskspace, it IS noarch, it saves a ton of
> build time too. It allows easier adding of other architectures as well.
>
> Why not wait for FC3? Well I want the kernel development tree to be the same
> tree updates come from, and remain stable at all times. That avoids double
> work an missed bugfixes
Having kernel-source become noarch is a non-issue from the impact on
ISVs. The renaming is the problem.
Dax Kelson
Guru Labs
More information about the fedora-devel-list
mailing list