On Monday 27 December 2010 11:53 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Dec 2010 15:37:59 -0800
> Suvayu Ali wrote:
>
>> Hi Kevin,
>>
>> My question is OT, but just curious.
>>
>> On Sunday 26 December 2010 03:22 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>>> Frankly the root-doc package is a bad idea, IMHO, but the mai
On Sun, 26 Dec 2010 15:37:59 -0800
Suvayu Ali wrote:
> Hi Kevin,
>
> My question is OT, but just curious.
>
> On Sunday 26 December 2010 03:22 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > Frankly the root-doc package is a bad idea, IMHO, but the maintainer
> > disagrees:https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?i
Hi Kevin,
My question is OT, but just curious.
On Sunday 26 December 2010 03:22 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> Frankly the root-doc package is a bad idea, IMHO, but the maintainer
> disagrees:https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=621812
>
Why is it a bad idea? I thought the maintainer explained
On Sun, 26 Dec 2010 18:10:38 -0500
Genes MailLists wrote:
>
> I noticed today that the root-doc-xx-noarch.rpm is 650 Mb
>
> And I have a copy in each arch directory of my internal mirror.
>
> (1) Would it make sense to introduce a noarch directory ?
>
>updates
>14
>
I noticed today that the root-doc-xx-noarch.rpm is 650 Mb
And I have a copy in each arch directory of my internal mirror.
(1) Would it make sense to introduce a noarch directory ?
updates
14
i386
x86_64
noarch
...
etc
