On 3/16/21 6:00 PM, Pierre Schmitz via arch-dev-public wrote:
> Hi, I saw your post; I just did not want to go off-topic right away.
> :-) At least as long as I am the only contributor I hesitate to give
> up on how the infrastructure is set up. It seems to be much more
> complex to do this on "off
Hi, I saw your post; I just did not want to go off-topic right away.
:-) At least as long as I am the only contributor I hesitate to give
up on how the infrastructure is set up. It seems to be much more
complex to do this on "official" servers. I like being able to switch
things around outside of j
On Sun, 14 Mar 2021 at 15:17, Levente Polyak via arch-dev-public
wrote:
>
> On 3/14/21 3:07 PM, Pierre Schmitz via arch-dev-public wrote:
> > I just updated the server to also accept x86_64 feature levels, ARM
> > and even i686. There is a new version of pkgstats (>= 3.1.0; currently
> > in [testi
On 3/14/21 3:07 PM, Pierre Schmitz via arch-dev-public wrote:
> I just updated the server to also accept x86_64 feature levels, ARM
> and even i686. There is a new version of pkgstats (>= 3.1.0; currently
> in [testing]) which is able to detect feature levels. ARM support is
> pretty early, but x86
I just updated the server to also accept x86_64 feature levels, ARM
and even i686. There is a new version of pkgstats (>= 3.1.0; currently
in [testing]) which is able to detect feature levels. ARM support is
pretty early, but x86_64 should be fine (using Intel's cpuid library).
If you like to chec
Hi Pierre,
I think at this point we should actually convert the "pet project" into
an real official service hosted under the archlinux.org hood :)
cheers,
Levente
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On 3/7/21 8:40 AM, Pierre Schmitz via arch-dev-public wrote:
> While I am at it, I'd like to also support different ARM architectures
> provided by archlinuxarm.org (or maybe even i486/i686 by
> archlinux32.org). There is a small catch though and the reason I am
> asking for your opinion: While we
Hi all,
while reading Allan's RFC about increasing Arch's CPU requirements(*)
I had the idea to start tracking the different x86_64 architecture
level using pkgstats. I am sure whether to drop support for old CPUs
is not a matter of "if" but "when"; similar as it was with i686.
Therefore it should
