Seth Vidal wrote: > > On Tue, 28 Apr 2009, James Olin Oden wrote: > >> Cheers...james >> >> P.S. Now I did bring up a premise that may not be true, which was that >> the issue is not "Technical" but that it was a RedHat "Process" >> problem. If I'm wrong in that regard, then actually a solution is >> achievable, and one might work on the problem, and not be a RedHat >> employee. I do agree that there are technical things one could do to >> help solve the problem, but its seems to me that the main thing they >> need is an automated rebuild of the world to detect if there is indeed >> a problem with the build being self hostable. I would guess RedHat >> has this capability in their build system, and if they do, it would be >> a decision to use it or not...which is a process issue. > > > I'm not going to comment on red hat processes b/c I honestly don't know > them and cannot answer for them. I do know a few things about > Fedora's processes for completely rebuilding the distro and since some of > the future rhel processes come out of the fedora processes I think looking > at how a complete rebuild of fedora happens might be the most valuable. the biggest problem it's not enough. ie. it's not enough to sometime do a massrebuild (it's just happened because of gcc and rpm update), but under normal circumstances we can't do a massrebuild for all new packages (until we'll have so much computational power:-) imho the current fedora process is also bad (ie. the same can happened in fedora like in rhel with ifd-egate and pcsc-lite). ps. i think i start a new thread on fedora-devel since it's nothing to do with centos since the centos team can't do anything with upstream problems. -- Levente "Si vis pacem para bellum!"