Re: bootstrap-vz packaging
> I just reviewed 118 and 119 patches and agree that 118 is worth having
> but I'm not sure about 119 do we really care for i386?
> Do you think that there are people who are still using i386 on 'cloud'
> or virtualised setups? I have to admit that is not a big patch but ...
> Balint I'm cc'ing cloud list so maybe somebody else would like to
> voice opinion regarding above.
I know it's a bit of a pain to backport fixes like this, but at the same
time, we can't just don't care about it to the point of nearly ditch one
of the two architecures that bootstrap-vz supports. Also, take care of
issues like this is one of the perks of being a package mantainer.
On 6 August 2014 15:08, Marcin Kulisz <email@example.com> wrote:
> On 2014-08-06 12:43:57, Bálint Réczey wrote:
>> Hi Marcin,
>> OK, I will follow this work-flow.
>> I have uploaded the package to NEW and also tagged the version I uploaded.
> Thx a lot.
>> EC2 AMI building still does not work due to dhcpcd missing from
>> Jessie. I think it would be useful to back-port the changes fixing
>> that from https://github.com/andsens/bootstrap-vz/pull/118 even before
>> upstream makes a new release.
> Yee, this makes sens.
>> Would you like to do that or you let it for me?
> I just reviewed 118 and 119 patches and agree that 118 is worth having but I'm
> not sure about 119 do we really care for i386?
> Do you think that there are people who are still using i386 on 'cloud' or
> virtualised setups? I have to admit that is not a big patch but ... .
> Balint I'm cc'ing cloud list so maybe somebody else would like to voice opinion
> regarding above.
> |_|0|_| |
> |_|_|0| "Heghlu'Meh QaQ jajVam" |
> |0|0|0| -------- kuLa --------- |
> gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 0x58C338B3
> 3DF1 A4DF C732 4688 38BC F121 6869 30DD 58C3 38B3
Tiago "Myhro" Ilieve
Montes Claros - MG, Brasil