Hi,
On Sat, Mar 12, 2005 at 05:56:35AM -0500, R P Herrold wrote: > > Updates and priority of release of updates, and pre-testing of > some new major 'point' updates and the version 4 major > release, are important to CentOS' maintainers. Access to > physical hardware, and hardware configuration coverage (rather > than building in an emulator) are important and are ongoing > challenges; I encourage members of this list who use CentOS to > proactively file reproducable bug reports. See: > http://www.centos.org/bugs/ > As the maintainer of this kind of stuff, i have to say, that emulator is just fine. For the rates IBM is chaging you to get XXX MIPS/month, is king of something i don't expect anyone just donate. It's much cheaper to get for example 50MIPS/arch for emulator and it can be ran locally w/o any hasles with network access. What is said about BUGs, is true. If i do my work under emulator, there is just small subset of the hardware available during testing. It's impossible to know if certain feature is working or not w/o the hardware. Even tho this work is no way to be mixed with that upstream PNAELV, it's helping them too, if the found BUGs are reported to upstream bugzilla or us (as in CentOS), so we can report those upstream. Helps to make the product better anyway for all of us. Then again about the Fedora. If there aren't anyone even running that Fedora Core development stuff, noone outside of the building community is actually testing if it's working at all. As it has said, the Fedora mostly does build those to see if those _build_ (correct me if i remember wrong). I'd test myself more, but i don't even have linux on 'real iron' anymore, so for emulator stuff it's just too painfuly slow even trying to keep up with the rapidly moving target, like Fedora Core. People who does run/test Fedora Core, will contribute to next generation of 'Enterprise Linux' releases. Just running silently isn't enought tho as noone knows about it :P If i have understodd it right, Fedora Core project now has much more interest for integrating more arches to the whole development project. As mentioned, there is consideration of making ia64 'official' and i do think ppc(32) will be somehow 'official' too soonish. w/o resources, testers, reporting it would be pointless to make more effort to keep s390(x) working during development cycles, which are rapid indeed. My point would mostly be that running something isn't anought for contributing to the development. There has to be feedback to make things work and progress. When you do pay for your linux, you can 'demand' support, but for other stuff, one must be actively interacting him/herself. Lot of words just coming out of my keyboard, but does it makes sense, beats me. -- Pasi Pirhonen - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://iki.fi/upi/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
