x86_64 FC2 repo not up yet?

[Eric Rostetter]

Quoting Joe Harrington <jh at oobleck.astro.cornell.edu>:

> Ok, I now see in the FAQ that Legacy doesn't support x86_64.  But

Then you read it wrong.  It says:

---
Initially we will only be supporting x86 architectures. With the Fedora Core
releases, x86_64 (amd64) architectures will become supported as well.

With Fedora Core, we will attempt to provide support for all architectures for
which Fedora Core has official support. However, our support will depend on the
availability of those architectures for QA testing.

We always provide source RPM packages so that people using other architectures
can rebuild them for use on their architecture. 
---

So, it isn't that we are not supporting it, it is that until recently there
was no need to support it, and now that there is, we've not yet set up any
infrastructor for it, and we don't yet have enough people wanting it and
willing to support it.

> regardless of the item buried deep in the FAQ, the general population
> thinks Legacy will maintain whatever Red Hat produces, and since
> that's not the case, it should be made prominently clear.

Well, it is the case, but only if we have sufficient community 
interest/support/involvement.  And, we may not be able to support
everything on day one, sometimes there may be a delay in getting
support for something.

> The Fedora Project makes statements like "the Fedora Steering
> Committee would like to announce the transfer of Fedora Core 2 to the
> Fedora Legacy Project" on its web page.  There's an implication here
> that Legacy will then do something with the release, and that
> implication makes people who are deciding what distro to use feel that
> they won't be stranded if they use Fedora.

First, we have no control over what FP puts on their web page or when
they put it there.  And secondly, the implication you cite is just the
implication we want, though at times we may drop the ball and be
unprepared or get to things in a less than timely fashion.

> I shouldn't have to read a
> FAQ on another website to find critical info when I choose whether to
> run a distro (but I think I did, in fact, read the Legacy FAQ when I
> made that decision last summer).

You only need read the main web page where it says the transition of
FC is underway but not yet complete.
 
> Right now the only hint that not everything recent is maintained is
> the little word "select" on the front page.

No, the statement that we've not yet transitioned FC2 to FLP clearly
states that not everything is maintained yet for FC2.  And many places
we discuss that support for anything requires community support/involvment/etc.

> I think an appropriate
> (and fairly minimal) notice would be to add a statement to the "What
> is..." section of the main web page like "Note that we do not maintain
> updates for all architectures or all releases; please refer to the
> maintenance grid for more information" and link that to a grid listing
> all of the RH releases down the left, all of the architectures across
> the top, and giving a letter in each cell:
> 
> Y	maintained
> N	not maintained
> n/a	combination never existed
> F	future maintenance planned
> D	maintenance being dropped within the next 2 months

Sounds like basically a good idea.  Notice on the right side of the main
page is a list of supported OS versions though, and note that FC2 isn't
there yet.

Until now, we've not really needed anything like you propose above.  But
in the future we probably should have such as list.  I'll see what I can
do, but I may need help (hint hint).

> Of course, I hope for x86_64 maintenance soon.  The architecture is
> widely used in HPC environments, particularly in academia, and it is
> particularly difficult to upgrade the OS on an HPC cluster.  I'd be
> willing to bet that, if approached, AMD or even Red Hat would provide
> the necessary hardware.  Getting QA testers is key, of course.  Users
> will be growing in number, though I don't know what the numbers are
> for FC2.

Sounds about right.  Might you be interested in participating?  I don't
remember seeing a "Self Introduction" or other notice from you... ;)

> Thanks,
> 
> --jh--

-- 
Eric Rostetter