Rebuild exisitng errata for x86_64?

[Jesse Keating]

On Sat, 2006-03-04 at 11:08 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> I dont think legacy is going to be using the build system as much as 
> core and extras. It might be better to use a common pool of build 
> systems separated by access time or build cycles rather than a physical 
> allocation of individual build systems. In other words, does the current 
> model of separation serve any real purpose other than being 
> theoretically more clean? 

More clean.  It allows us to make modifications to plague/mock that are
necessary for Legacy w/out interrupting what Extras is doing or using.
Sure our patches would go upstream, but it shouldn't be necessary to
interrupt the Extras system to make a change for the Legacy systems.
Core doesn't use these systems so that is a completely different ball of
wax (that doesn't need to be discussed here)

-- 
Jesse Keating RHCE      (geek.j2solutions.net)
Fedora Legacy Team      (www.fedoralegacy.org)
GPG Public Key          (geek.j2solutions.net/jkeating.j2solutions.pub)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 191 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-legacy-list/attachments/20060303/a9652aca/attachment.sig>