-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
Hello Fellow Contributors!
Our kernel team has been adrift in bugs roughly forever. The time we
spend on triage is time we don't get to spend fixing substantial bugs
on hardware lots of people are using, especially new/emergent
hardware. We have spoken previously about the difficulty of kernel bug
19 matches
Mail list logo
