> On Tue, 28 Feb 2012 16:37:50 -0600
> Mike Chambers wrote:
>
> > Noticed that x86_64 tree is still NOT installable, as in no
> > boot.iso
> > or anything. Is this going to remain that way for awhile?
>
> Well, it's going to stay that way until the bug that prevents it
> working is fixed. :)
>
On Tue, 2012-02-28 at 22:16 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-02-28 at 16:37 -0600, Mike Chambers wrote:
> > Noticed that x86_64 tree is still NOT installable, as in no boot.iso or
> > anything. Is this going to remain that way for awhile?
>
> Is there a reason you can't use the Alpha
On Tue, 2012-02-28 at 16:37 -0600, Mike Chambers wrote:
> Noticed that x86_64 tree is still NOT installable, as in no boot.iso or
> anything. Is this going to remain that way for awhile?
Is there a reason you can't use the Alpha boot.iso?
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw
On Tue, 28 Feb 2012 16:37:50 -0600
Mike Chambers wrote:
> Noticed that x86_64 tree is still NOT installable, as in no boot.iso
> or anything. Is this going to remain that way for awhile?
Well, it's going to stay that way until the bug that prevents it
working is fixed. :)
It seems no one has
Noticed that x86_64 tree is still NOT installable, as in no boot.iso or
anything. Is this going to remain that way for awhile?
--
Mike Chambers
Madisonville, KY
"Best little town on Earth!"
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/de
