Re: FC1 in archive missing a bunch of RPMs?

2015-10-26 Thread Justin Forbes
Also, intel wasn't shipping x86_64 systems at the time, FC1 was pretty specifically AMD64, and there was a lot of weirdness back then. On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 11:08 PM, Justin Forbes wrote: > FC1 32bit was a little bit different. Technically x86_64 was a secondary > arch

Re: FC1 in archive missing a bunch of RPMs?

2015-10-26 Thread Justin Forbes
FC1 32bit was a little bit different. Technically x86_64 was a secondary arch at the time, in fact the RH build system couldn't get everything together and the ISOs were built on my home system. By FC2, this wasn't an issue anymore. I would not be surprised if the archives were a bit off as the

Re: FC1 in archive missing a bunch of RPMs?

2015-10-23 Thread Stephen John Smoogen
On 23 October 2015 at 14:52, Adam Williamson wrote: > I happened to notice last night that: > > https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/archive/fedora/linux/core/1/x86_64/os/Fedora/RPMS/ > > seems very incomplete - it's like it's truncated, it has everything > alphabetically

Re: FC1 in archive missing a bunch of RPMs?

2015-10-23 Thread Gary Gatling
On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 4:52 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > I happened to notice last night that: > > > https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/archive/fedora/linux/core/1/x86_64/os/Fedora/RPMS/ > > seems very incomplete - it's like it's truncated, it has everything >

FC1 in archive missing a bunch of RPMs?

2015-10-23 Thread Adam Williamson
I happened to notice last night that: https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/archive/fedora/linux/core/1/x86_64/os/Fedora/RPMS/ seems very incomplete - it's like it's truncated, it has everything alphabetically up to 'beecrypt' and nothing after. Compare to the i386 dir, which looks full: