Re: [Spacewalk-devel] Dropping i386 for Spacewalk Server?
On 03/25/2011 08:16 PM, Luc de Louw wrote: The other question that arises is: How would this affect RHN-Satellite? I got this idea for Spacewalk. It is still my personal idea. When and if we do this for Spacewalk, then we may start thinking about RHN Satellite. But that is far future. -- Miroslav Suchy Red Hat Satellite Engineering ___ Spacewalk-devel mailing list Spacewalk-devel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-devel
Re: [Spacewalk-devel] Dropping i386 for Spacewalk Server?
Miroslav Suchý wrote: On 03/25/2011 02:00 PM, Michael Gliwinski wrote: Anyway, may I ask why? Is it getting in the way somehow? It cost resources. Especially for testing. Think of the big picture matrix of OS + arch combinations. http://spacewalk.redhat.com/yum/1.3/ Fedora 13 1) i386 2) x86_64 Fedora 14 3) i386 4) x86_64 RHEL 5 5) i386 6) x86_64 RHEL 6 7) i386 8) x86_64 To release, that is at least 8 combinations to ensure they build, install and function. Plus upgrade paths to each. Dropping i386, cuts this work in half, allowing us to release quicker/easier (ideally). Cliff ___ Spacewalk-devel mailing list Spacewalk-devel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-devel
Re: [Spacewalk-devel] Dropping i386 for Spacewalk Server?
On Friday 25 Mar 2011 14:34:38 Cliff Perry wrote: Miroslav Suchý wrote: On 03/25/2011 02:00 PM, Michael Gliwinski wrote: Anyway, may I ask why? Is it getting in the way somehow? It cost resources. Especially for testing. Think of the big picture matrix of OS + arch combinations. http://spacewalk.redhat.com/yum/1.3/ Fedora 13 1) i386 2) x86_64 Fedora 14 3) i386 4) x86_64 RHEL 5 5) i386 6) x86_64 RHEL 6 7) i386 8) x86_64 To release, that is at least 8 combinations to ensure they build, install and function. Plus upgrade paths to each. Dropping i386, cuts this work in half, allowing us to release quicker/easier (ideally). Got it. Didn't realise you do separate testing for each combination :P Which rel would you intend to be the first x86_64-only one? 1.4 or later? -- Michael Gliwinski Henderson Group Information Services 9-11 Hightown Avenue, Newtownabby, BT36 4RT Phone: 028 9034 3319 ** The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee and access to the email by anyone else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. When addressed to our clients, any opinions or advice contained in this e-mail are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing client engagement leter or contract. If you have received this email in error please notify supp...@henderson-group.com John Henderson (Holdings) Ltd Registered office: 9 Hightown Avenue, Mallusk, County Antrim, Northern Ireland, BT36 4RT. Registered in Northern Ireland Registration Number NI010588 Vat No.: 814 6399 12 * ___ Spacewalk-devel mailing list Spacewalk-devel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-devel
Re: [Spacewalk-devel] Dropping i386 for Spacewalk Server?
On 03/25/2011 03:34 PM, Cliff Perry wrote: Miroslav Suchý wrote: On 03/25/2011 02:00 PM, Michael Gliwinski wrote: Anyway, may I ask why? Is it getting in the way somehow? It cost resources. Especially for testing. Think of the big picture matrix of OS + arch combinations. http://spacewalk.redhat.com/yum/1.3/ Fedora 13 1) i386 2) x86_64 Fedora 14 3) i386 4) x86_64 RHEL 5 5) i386 6) x86_64 RHEL 6 7) i386 8) x86_64 People tend to re-use old hardware as test-beds. A lot of this hardware is still 32bit. On the other hand, I agree with Cliff, it costs resources and thus time and money. How about a compromise? Drop i386 support for Fedora and keep it for EL5 and EL6? The other question that arises is: How would this affect RHN-Satellite? Thanks, Luc ___ Spacewalk-devel mailing list Spacewalk-devel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-devel
