FC1 in archive missing a bunch of RPMs?

[Justin Forbes]

FC1 32bit was a little bit different.  Technically x86_64 was a secondary
arch at the time, in fact the RH build system couldn't get everything
together and the ISOs were built on my home system. By FC2, this wasn't an
issue anymore.  I would not be surprised if the archives were a bit off as
the official FC1 x86_64 was completed and pushed a bit after the official
FC1 i686 release.

Justin

On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 5:07 PM, Gary Gatling <gsgatlin at ncsu.edu> wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 4:52 PM, Adam Williamson <
> adamwill at fedoraproject.org> wrote:
>
>> I happened to notice last night that:
>>
>>
>> https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/archive/fedora/linux/core/1/x86_64/os/Fedora/RPMS/
>>
>> seems very incomplete - it's like it's truncated, it has everything
>> alphabetically up to 'beecrypt' and nothing after. Compare to the i386
>> dir, which looks full:
>>
>>
>
> I had problems with various things doing 64 bit installs from FC1-FC4 when
> I tried it a couple of years ago. But fedora 5 onward seemed to work ok for
> me. I have all the fedora releases in KVM vms in case I need to go back and
> look at stuff. I was able to do 32 bit installs of FC1-4. Its just the 64
> bit parts that didn't seem to work for various reasons IIRC. From fedora 5
> to present I was able to make 32 and 64 bit vms. But then again maybe I
> just wasn't trying hard enough with those very early releases.
>
>
>
> --
> devel mailing list
> devel at lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20151026/ede347ed/attachment.html>