ARM as a primary architecture
limburgher at gmail.com
Tue Mar 20 15:54:43 UTC 2012
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 10:52 AM, Peter Jones <pjones at redhat.com> wrote:
> Jon, Brendan,
> In yesterday's FESCo meeting I told you I'd make a list of specific issues
> I have with the current proposal for ARM as a primary archictecture. There
> are some places where I think the current proposal fails to deal with some
> necessary aspects of becoming a primary architecture, and some places where
> I don't think the approach is quite right. So without further ado:
Excellent, can you add this to the ticket?
> 1) mechanisms need to be in place to get package maintainers access to fix
> arm-specific bugs in their packages
> 2) excludearch is not an option. This is fundamentally contrary to being
> a primary arch. In fact this is one of the defining characteristics of
> a secondary arch.
> 3) arm must be integrated to the formal release criteria
> 4) when milestones occur, arm needs to be just as testible as other
> primary architectures
> 5) installation methods must be in place. I'm not saying it has to be
> using the same model as x86, but when we get to beta, if it can't be
> installed, it can't meet similar release criteria to existing or prior
> primary arches. Where possible, we should be using anaconda for
> installation, though I'd be open to looking at using it to build installed
> images for machines with severe resource constraints.
> 6) supported platforms must be fully integrated into building and
> installation. If you need a special build procedure to make this happen
> for kernel, we need to have rel-eng signing off saying they've approved
> of whatever method that is, and QE signing off that they think it'll
> result in a something they can claim is tested enough to release as a
> primary arch.
> 7) it can't be a serious maintenance burdon due to build related issues.
> We need a couple of groups to sign off that builds are fast enough, not
> just on a "full distro rebuild" (throughput) level, but also on a
> "doesn't destroy my workflow due to waiting on it" (latency) level.
> Obviously any feedback you guys have on this is welcome.
> Old MacDonald had an agricultural real-estate tax abatement.
> devel mailing list
> devel at lists.fedoraproject.org
in your fear, seek only peace
in your fear, seek only love
More information about the devel