Subject: Re: please add glibc -2.2.4 under errata for YDL 2.1
From: Patrick Callahan (pac1@tiac.net)
Date: Thu Oct 18 2001 - 05:06:00 MDT
> Well, our build environment is contained within a chroot'd partition
> of a running system. While it's not YDL from scratch like from tarballs,
> it is sort of a bootstraping process (e.g. install chroot from latest rpms,
> rebuild from cvs; repeat).
>
> I'm building the new build system to allow for "plugging in" new developers
> to own certain packages. Perhaps this is a way that folks can get involved.
>
You should do the XP thing with this. Talk to a lot of us about how this
should work.
> We could create documents on RPM packaging standards, patch standards,
> version standards (e.g. we don't like having pre-release software in the
> distribution), etc..
Can't fault you on that!
> that user developers can conform to.
> So, someone like
> yourself could own the "xchat" module in our cvs and keep it current
> via the build system. Your updates would be queued to the central build
> server and uploaded to sOn Wednesday 17 October 2001 09:51, you wrote:
> > Something that would allow us to build the complete YDL into a separate
> > partition might help. YDL from Scratch?
>some public repository with the other "ruffpack"
> developement rpms.
Wow!
How about four levels of yup
YDL official You control this directly
YDL contrib You control who gets to contribute,
stuff has to work with the official stuff
YDL leading edge Guys like Frank Sirl get to contribute.
Latest stable or semi stable glib, gcc etc.
YDL bleeding edge You grab the latest sources and there they are folks
go get em.
With yup working off any one of the four, and into any of up to four
partitions.
Users are advised to have up to four partitions with YDL installed on each
and they can independently yup any of the four levels into any of the
partitions. Then boot into whichever partition the want today.
> I would love this from one aspect as it would mean I'd have less details to
> worry about. E.g. it's very time comsuming to keep everything current.
> Thus, a big part of the number of updates to 2.1 were based upon what I
> could handle time wise. So if things like xchat were "just updated" by a
> group of dedicated contributors, I could focus on core things like the
> kernel, toolchain, XFree86, etc. and integration for release.
>
Most things upgrade pretty smoothly. All of the Xchat versions since 1.7.6
were like that. Just build and install. No problems.
> My problem is, we're clearly a business that sells CDs. We don't really
> have the ability to pay folks to help with the distribution be it as a YDL
> employee or as a contributor.
You don't need to give me any money. I do this stuff to learn. My employer
pays the bills. I want to support you guys by buying your CDs.
> And while a lot of open source companies is
> about leveraging off of open source work... I realllly don't feel right
> about not compensating contributors.
Open source is about being able to change the sources, not about any
financial arrangements.
> So, is there a way we could work this
> minus actual cash payment so contributors are happy and I feel okay about
> the deal?
>
Free Beer! This would make some of us if not happy, at least somewhat
inebriated. (YMMV. Avoid operating dangerous equipment, driving, installing
linux upgrades...)
> > What's the complete list of "not the latest stable version" packages in
> > YDL 2.1?
>
> Well, the vast majority of YDL 2.1 (and 2.0) is based on Red Hat 7.
> Some other stuff is Red Hat 7.1 based. Some other stuff is Rawhide based
> (XFree86 4.1.0), and some other stuff is rolled by us (kernel 2.4.10-12a).
>
Do you keep a database of this kind of info?
Would you like to? Can I help you with that? For free?
-Pat
This archive was generated by hypermail 2a24 : Thu Oct 18 2001 - 04:16:21 MDT