On 29/1/22 11:28, Morten Linderud via arch-dev-public wrote:
On Sat, Jan 29, 2022 at 11:22:32AM +1000, Allan McRae via arch-dev-public wrote:
On 29/1/22 11:13, Morten Linderud via arch-dev-public wrote:
On Sat, Jan 29, 2022 at 10:12:30AM +1000, Allan McRae via arch-dev-public wrote:
Is there any particular objection to requiring packagers upload both
architectures?
I'm personally not really motivated doing the required builds. We have an
underdeveloped infrastructure which hasn't changed since we abandoned i686 5
years ago.
I'd personally like to see more work on our build tooling before we commit to
new architectures.
FYI, it is a single extra command. Either of these will work...
offload-build --arch x86_64_v3
extra-x86_64_v3-build
Nothing else changes for the packager.
Allan
I'll spend twice as long waiting for a package to build which increases the time
spent packaging. Which again requires me to spend more time watching stuff fly
by.
I have concerns if that is how you spend your time... :)
This also assumes people are capable of using the buildserver which is not
always the case either.
This wasn't great with i686, and I'm not sure why we'd find this acceptable
today?
What was not great with i686? We managed two architectures for many,
many years. The reason for removing i686 was to do with outdated
technology, not to do with build times or infrastructure.
Do you have objections beyond not wanting to package for both repos?
i.e. do you object to option C in my original email, where we have a
team to keep the repos in sync when package maintainers do not build both?
Allan
