On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 11:23:02AM +0100, Mark Trompell wrote: > I'll try to keep this discussion going, will you be able to minimally > help out and explain what you did (how and why), > Actually I would like to have things rebuild from ground but let's > face it until we don't have more people fluent in that lowlevel stuff > We should just go for binary or srpm import of a sane fedora base and > keep options open to go to more independance step by step if we want > and more devs pop in (if that happens at all) > We need to quickly line out a way to get to f3 and then having people > comitting time in doing the tasks.
so what are the next steps? where are the holdups? can we temporarily fork conary to get the patches needed to import fedora? are those patches enough, or are there more issues? does that import then produce a runnable system? what else is needed to be able to migrate from fl:2? is that an issue only with supporting updateall and shouldn't "conary migrate" work in any case? or is even "conary migrate" problematic? greetings, martin. -- eKita - the online platform for your entire academic life hackerspace beijing - http://qike.info -- chief engineer eKita.co pike programmer pike.lysator.liu.se caudium.net foresight developer realss.com foresightlinux.org unix sysadmin trainer developer societyserver.org Martin Bähr working in china http://societyserver.org/mbaehr/ _______________________________________________ Foresight-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.foresightlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/foresight-devel
