On 04/11/2011 11:54 PM, Tru Huynh wrote:
On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 03:37:28PM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
On 4/11/2011 2:59 PM, Tru Huynh wrote:
Make your own experiment (i.e rebuild your own clone) and document/report back
what you find out as the proper order of rebuild of the upstream SRPMS ?
So having everyone repeat the same mistakes with no coordination is your
idea of doing things faster?
who is everyone?
I might throw some time and equipment at it if I knew I wasn't
re-inventing square wheels (or even round ones for that matter). And I
suspect that others smarter than I am would do the same and maybe even
improve the approach by coming up with ways to predict the build
environment needed to reproduce a given binary to reduce the
trial-and-error time.
Same answer for you than I made for Dag, volonteer to coordinate, build,
write scripts, publish *your* work and you will be helping your fellows.
Oh really? If each tech would do his own rebuild and then publish it we
would end up with a few thousand more distributions. I doubt we all can
then follow all that work.
I think we are having this discussion since we want to improve CentOS,
not have our own distro. I think if somebody wants his own, he already
has it or he is working on it behind closed doors (ahem...).
But I don't see this happening if the process
stays closed any more than I think there would be a useful Linux today -
or most of the packages comprising Red Hat's product - if development
had not been open and shared.
I only see wasted time talking, no actions. I will be happy to be proven wrong.
Tru
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
