On Fri, 2 Jun 2017, Dinar Valeev wrote:
On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 10:54 AM, Marcus Meissner <meissner@suse.de> wrote:
On Fri, Jun 02, 2017 at 10:51:57AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, 2 Jun 2017, Dominique Leuenberger / DimStar wrote:
On Fri, 2017-06-02 at 10:01 +0200, Normand wrote:
Hello there, What is supposed to be the "normal" process to have PowerPC TW project to be in sync with TW ?
Do we have to monitor manually the 273 specific packages in (1) and check with potential changes in (2) ? Or is there some tools to warn of the differences ?
(1) https://build.opensuse.org/project/show/openSUSE:Factory:PowerPC (2) https://build.opensuse.org/project/show/openSUSE:Factory
As somebody created actual packages in oS:F:PowerPC instead of submitting fixes to the actual real package in oS:F (via devel), those need to be monitored manually (hopefully the fixes did get submitted and will come their way)
As soon as a package is created in :PowerPC, it is decoupled from oS:F and no longer under the control of this project.
I'd go with verifying if the packages are links to oS:F and if they are, if they contain any diff. Links without diff can simply be dropped (they will be inherited from openSUSE:Factory again)
I wonder why we even allow this to happen.
A quick peek shows that a lot of these are just source links where "ppc" is enabled.
This seems so that "ppc" 32bit is not built by default, just selected packages.
This is annoying. Howdy, Those are bootstrap required for ppc64
we have to branch due to the fact it is not possible to disable/enable particular arch on a link
We could easily go the s390x way of %disable_32bit 1 in prjconf for ppc64. That should remove the requirement of -32bit packages (but also the 32bit GCC runtime then). Richard. -- Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de> SUSE LINUX GmbH, GF: Felix Imendoerffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nuernberg) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org