For your consideration: Secondary Architectures in Fedora

Hans de Goede j.w.r.degoede at
Wed May 30 07:26:27 UTC 2007

Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> On 5/29/07, David Woodhouse <dwmw2 at> wrote:
>> I see no reason why failed builds should be pushed to the repo without
>> the maintainer even bothering to look at the failure and file a bug
>> explaining it. Once an architecture is up and running, 'new' build
>> failures on that arch really aren't very common -- and when they do
>> happen, they're usually the responsibility of the package maintainer
>> rather than something the arch experts need to look in to anyway.
> I think i agree with you on this.  I think a build failure needs to
> result in some definitive action  so that the appropriate group can
> figure out how to fix it.  If the maintainer decides to excludearch
> that arch... then so be it...but its then at least documented for
> later investigation.


The fact that koji now builds for ppc64 has shaken a few bugs out of some of my 
packages, most of which every packager should be able to fix (with a little 
help if needed). I think that just allowing packages to fail for secondary 
archs, is too easy. Atleast people should try to get things to build, and if 
that fails add it to some kinda tracker bug.



More information about the fedora-devel-list mailing list