On Mon, Aug 06, 2007 at 11:22:02AM -0400, Jesse Keating wrote: > On Mon, 6 Aug 2007 17:06:25 +0200 > Axel Thimm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > It's just something to think about whether this is wanted at all - > > with the current Fedora release cycles it doesn't hurt to add a new > > arch to devel only. But if koji is used for RHEL or other longer-cycle > > products not being able to add an arch for a released product (or > > having to rebuild everything for all other arches as well due to > > artificial release bumps) could become an issue. > > In RHEL at least we'd want to rebuild the package anyway. You can't > come along 4 months or 2 years later to request that another arch be > done of that build, unless you can generate a repodata set that matched > the original repodata set and all the original used packages to build > your package 4 months or 2 years ago. Buildroot content changes over > time and you don't want 3 of your arches using one set of build tools > and your new arch using potentially vastly different ones.
RHEL is quite different and already equipped to do builds in fixed environments like for customer requested RHEL X update Y states. Furthermore RHEL is not update happy, certainly not in comparison to Fedora, so 4 months or 2 years usually still means the same API/ABI (short of the kernel, of course). But I was told in the interim that the pain of the past of adding archs to released RHELs hardened the RHEL engineering teem enough to fence off any such future requests. ;) -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
pgp6hhYSGXKQF.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- Fedora-buildsys-list mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-buildsys-list
