[Pulp-dev] dropping i386 support in Pulp

Brian Bouterse bbouters at redhat.com
Wed Dec 14 19:34:37 UTC 2016

Thank you for following up. +1 to dropping i386 support because**. However,
I think we should adjust the statement to be that Pulp only supports X86_64
at this time until we can develop a plan to bring in more architectures.
One outcome of that is that i386 would be dropped. If there is no one
opposed, making 2 tickets on it would be a good next step. One ticket to
issue the statement via blog post and pulp-list, and another to update the
build machinery to stop publishing i386.

**: (a) we provide an incomplete set of i386 packages today so it doesn't
actually work well, (b) we never QE on i386, and (c) I don't think anyone
is using them, but I have no evidence for that


On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 2:27 PM, Dennis Kliban <dkliban at redhat.com> wrote:

> It's been almost a week and I have not heard from anyone on this topic.
> Does that mean we all agree that Pulp should drop support for i386?
> -Dennis
> ----- Original Message -----
> > As I was adding Fedora 25 to Koji, I noticed that our Fedora 24 packages
> were
> > not being built for i386. Even though most of the packages in the Pulp
> repo
> > are 'noarch', the pymongo related packages need to be compiled
> specifically
> > for i386. With having said that, I don't think we should support i386
> > architecture. We should make a formal announcement about this. What are
> your
> > thoughts?
> >
> > -Dennis
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Pulp-dev mailing list
> > Pulp-dev at redhat.com
> > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Pulp-dev mailing list
> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/pulp-dev/attachments/20161214/45d13058/attachment.htm>

More information about the Pulp-dev mailing list