-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 25 Feb 2015 10:35:22 -0500
Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-02-25 at 14:01 +, Peter Robinson wrote:
> > > > This is an opportunity for community members for whom i686 is a
> > > > passion to join the team to participate in the bug
On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 5:43 AM, Jared K. Smith
wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 5:40 AM, drago01 wrote:
>>
>> i686 has nothing to do with ARM. So when someone says "i686" he/she
>> means "32bit x86".
>
>
>
> Well yes -- that's what *I* take it to mean -- I just wanted to make sure
> that's
On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 5:40 AM, drago01 wrote:
> i686 has nothing to do with ARM. So when someone says "i686" he/she
> means "32bit x86".
>
Well yes -- that's what *I* take it to mean -- I just wanted to make sure
that's what everyone else took it to mean as well. I just wanted to make
sure t
On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 11:38 AM, Jared K. Smith
wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 8:50 AM, Stephen Gallagher
> wrote:
>>
>> we should strongly consider demoting i686 to secondary architecture
>> for installation media at the Fedora 23 branch point (about six months
>> from now).
>
>
> Is this i
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 8:50 AM, Stephen Gallagher
wrote:
> we should strongly consider demoting i686 to secondary architecture
> for installation media at the Fedora 23 branch point (about six months
> from now).
>
Is this intended only for 32-bit kernels on x86-based processors, or for
other 3
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 08:15:51 -0500,
Josh Boyer wrote:
This is an opportunity for community members for whom i686 is a
passion to join the team to participate in the bugfixing required. We
previously called out the need for assistance[2], but had no
substantial response. We hope that being
On Wed, 2015-02-25 at 14:01 +, Peter Robinson wrote:
> > > This is an opportunity for community members for whom i686 is a
> > > passion to join the team to participate in the bugfixing
> > > required. We previously called out the need for assistance[2],
> > > but had no substantial response
> i686 Kernel SIG steps up and agrees to handle bugs on that platform
Interesting so you are saying that the kernel sub community is
effectively
only x86_64
If you are going down that road you better ask for every kernel
SIG
to emerge or step up in
On 02/25/2015 02:15 PM, Peter Robinson wrote:
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 2:14 PM, Peter Robinson wrote:
i686 Kernel SIG steps up and agrees to handle bugs on that platform
Interesting so you are saying that the kernel sub community is effectively
only x86_64
If you are going down that road you
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 9:15 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 2:14 PM, Peter Robinson wrote:
i686 Kernel SIG steps up and agrees to handle bugs on that platform
>>>
>>>
>>> Interesting so you are saying that the kernel sub community is effectively
>>> only x86_64
>>>
>>> I
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 2:14 PM, Peter Robinson wrote:
>>> i686 Kernel SIG steps up and agrees to handle bugs on that platform
>>
>>
>> Interesting so you are saying that the kernel sub community is effectively
>> only x86_64
>>
>> If you are going down that road you better ask for every kernel S
>> i686 Kernel SIG steps up and agrees to handle bugs on that platform
>
>
> Interesting so you are saying that the kernel sub community is effectively
> only x86_64
>
> If you are going down that road you better ask for every kernel SIG
> to emerge or step up in the process.
>
> Where does ARM fi
On 02/25/2015 01:50 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
i686 Kernel SIG steps up and agrees to handle bugs on that platform
Interesting so you are saying that the kernel sub community is
effectively only x86_64
If you are going down that road you better ask for every kernel
SIG to emerge or step
>> This is an opportunity for community members for whom i686 is a
>> passion to join the team to participate in the bugfixing required.
>> We previously called out the need for assistance[2], but had no
>> substantial response. We hope that being transparent about our
>> priorities will prompt int
On Wed, 2015-02-25 at 08:15 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
> This is an opportunity for community members for whom i686 is a
> passion to join the team to participate in the bugfixing required.
> We previously called out the need for assistance[2], but had no
> substantial response. We hope that bein
On Wed, 2015-02-25 at 14:30 +0100, drago01 wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 2:15 PM, Josh Boyer <
> jwbo...@fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> > Hello Fellow Contributors!
> >
> > [...]
> > It's possible down the road that, if there is no community
> > interest in i686, the project might look at other o
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 8:30 AM, drago01 wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 2:15 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> Hello Fellow Contributors!
>>
>> [...]
>> It's possible down the road that, if there is no community interest in
>> i686, the project might look at other options such as making i686 a
>> second
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 2:15 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> Hello Fellow Contributors!
>
> [...]
> It's possible down the road that, if there is no community interest in
> i686, the project might look at other options such as making i686 a
> secondary architecture. This is not because we want to drive aw
18 matches
Mail list logo
