On 04/11/2011 11:54 PM, Tru Huynh wrote: 
On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 03:37:28PM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:

On 4/11/2011 2:59 PM, Tru Huynh wrote:


          

            

              
Make your own experiment (i.e rebuild your own clone) and document/report back
what you find out as the proper order of rebuild of the upstream SRPMS ?


            

            
So having everyone repeat the same mistakes with no coordination is your
idea of doing things faster?


          

          
who is everyone?


        

        
I might throw some time and equipment at it if I knew I wasn't 
re-inventing square wheels (or even round ones for that matter).  And I 
suspect that others smarter than I am would do the same and maybe even 
improve the approach by coming up with ways to predict the build 
environment needed to reproduce a given binary to reduce the 
trial-and-error time.


      

      
Same answer for you than I made for Dag, volonteer to coordinate, build, 
write scripts, publish *your* work and you will be helping your fellows.


    

    Oh really? If each tech would do his own rebuild and then publish it
    we would end up with a few thousand more distributions. I doubt we
    all can then follow all that work.

    I think we are having this discussion since we want to improve
    CentOS, not have our own distro. I think if somebody wants his own,
    he already has it or he is working on it behind closed doors
    (ahem...).

    

      

        
 But I don't see this happening if the process 
stays closed any more than I think there would be a useful Linux today - 
or most of the packages comprising Red Hat's product - if development 
had not been open and shared.


      

      
I only see wasted time talking, no actions. I will be happy to be proven wrong.

Tru


      

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos