ppc64 builds
Jesse Keating
jkeating at redhat.com
Mon Mar 19 12:15:05 UTC 2007
On Sunday 18 March 2007 14:43:18 David Woodhouse wrote:
> This is true. I was just suggesting that we don't necessarily need to
> rush out and do a mass rebuild of all Extras packages before F7 just to
> create ppc64 versions of them, since those _wouldn't_ be likely to end
> up in the "ppc" compose; they'd only be in the pure ppc64 tree which
> isn't a product we release; it's just the same as the unshipped ia64,
> s390 rawhide trees.
Except that we need them to be able to build for ppc64. Every single build
from the merge point on will build for our primary arches, which at this time
is i386, x86_64, ppc, and ppc64. We can't selectively build things, that
arch has to be one for every package unless the package decides to not build
for that arch. That is part of being a primary arch. If a ppc64 build
fails, the entire build fails, and will have to be fixed.
Also, we've (the Fedora Board and I) have talked about actually "shipping" the
full tree for each arch. We accomplish this for i386, x86_64, and ppc by
nature of those composes, but we don't for ppc64. Just because we (Fedora)
made one decision about what to or not to ship ppc64 doesn't mean that should
be the same decision for anybody basing a distribution off of Fedora. They
should have equal access to the binary packages that fall out of our
buildsystem as we do, and that generally means shipping them in a directory.
During rawhide we continue doing the ppc64 directory of just 64bit packages,
at release time we ship a directory of them, and we continue to populate an
updates directory for it. This feels like the responsible thing to do, and
it only takes up a bit more space since we'd be building them anyway due to
ppc(64) being a primary arch.
--
Jesse Keating
Release Engineer: Fedora
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-maintainers/attachments/20070319/a500ea08/attachment.sig>
More information about the Fedora-maintainers
mailing list