[WBEL-devel] amd64 port

[Ryan Finnie]

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003, Jamey Fletcher wrote:
> I think that John is a bit concerned about signing ports he can't run &
> check - we were thinking more of a "whitebox-AMD64" key, generated
> separately, by the person who decides to step up and maintain the AMD64
> port.  Similarly for the Itanic port, when that happens.

True.  I just put up that item so I remember down the road that yes, we do
want to at least have the rpms for this port signed.

> John'll be glad to point to the downloads, we'll be happy to run the
> tracker for the BitTorrent, host a mailing list, if that works for
> everyone...

Setting up a whitebox-amd64 list would be useful, since it appears that
both Pasi and myself are working on this.

> Last night, when I left the Library, John was looking at four packages
> that would not build as a non-root user.  He was going to take a quick
> look at them to see why, compare the packages built as a non-root user
> and a root user, and unless something major came up - he was going to
> move the root-user built packages for the four that wouldn't build as
> non-root in and drive for -final by tomorrow.  A day for the FTP mirrors
> to sync before releasing the BitTorrents, and things will be moving!

Is John keeping track of what SRPMS he has changed between releases?
Because I'd really rather not download another 2GB of SRPMS if only 10% of
those have changed :)

Thanks
RF