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 -Brian On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 2:27 PM, Dennis Kliban <[email protected]> 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 > > [email protected] > > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev > > > > _______________________________________________ > Pulp-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev >
_______________________________________________ Pulp-dev mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
