For your consideration: Secondary Architectures in Fedora

David Woodhouse dwmw2 at
Thu May 31 19:23:02 UTC 2007

On Wed, 2007-05-30 at 19:35 -0400, Christopher Blizzard wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-05-30 at 09:49 -0400, Jesse Keating wrote:
> > And before somebody barks about it, I don't want to see us
> > 'officially supporting' an arch that has a tiny fraction of the user base.
> > *cough* ppc 
> ppc might be a small part of our user base, but at least it's very easy
> to get something that's fast and well supported.  Of the arches we're
> talking about ppc is clearly the one that is one that is most grey.
> Arm?  Sparc?  Other?  I don't think anyone has any illusions about
> whether or not those are secondary arches. :)

If the Cabal is going to decree that we're going to abandon good
engineering practice and let partially-failed builds make it through
into the repository without even a cursory inspection by the packager,
then there's a lot to be said for ensuring that our "primary arches"
include at least something 32-bit, something 64-bit, something
little-endian and something big-endian.


More information about the fedora-devel-list mailing list