x86_64 blocks i386?

David Woodhouse dwmw2 at infradead.org
Thu Mar 31 06:27:59 UTC 2005

On Sun, 2005-03-20 at 23:01 -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Well, if you want to play by the same rules as Core, any 
> arch failure blocks all arches. There have been arguments, of
> course, as to how well this rule works. :)

On the whole I think it works fairly well. It does mean that
occasionally a package owner drops in an 'ExcludeArch:' to get round a
temporary build problem, and forgets to take it out. (I'd still like to
see a policy that _all_ use of ExcludeArch: in packages should have a
bugzilla associated with it, btw)

Following the same policy for Extras would seem to make a lot of sense.
If we want Extras to be viable, we want maintainers who are actually
going to do the job completely and make things work on all supported
architectures; we don't want people dropping i386-only packages into the
system and calling themselves maintainers.

We come back to a discussion we had before about "packagers" vs.
"maintainers". If Extras is to be taken seriously, we need the latter.


More information about the fedora-extras-list mailing list