Peter Robinson wrote:
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 12:58 PM, Rudolf Kastl
<che666(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> 2009/10/6 Peter Robinson <pbrobinson(a)gmail.com>:
>
>> On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 10:59 AM, Rudolf Kastl <che666(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> yum list all |grep olpc
>>> dracut-modules-olpc.x86_64 0.2.1-2.fc12
rawhide
>>> olpc-contents.x86_64 2.6-2.fc12
rawhide
>>> olpc-library.noarch 2.0.2-2.fc12
rawhide
>>> olpc-netutils.noarch 0.7-4.fc12
rawhide
>>> olpc-switch-desktop.noarch 0.6-2.fc12
rawhide
>>> olpc-update.noarch 2.20-1.fc12
rawhide
>>> olpc-utils.x86_64 1.0.3-2.fc12
rawhide
>>>
>>> does it really make sense to have those modules available on
>>> x86/x86_64? (this is from rawhide)
>>>
>> Yes, because they are used on both x86 and x86_64 platforms. What is
>> the problem having them there?
>>
>> Peter
>>
> somehow i had the impression they are atleast partially related to the
> olpc hardware.
>
Those ones aren't necessarily, and even then why does that stop them
from being in rawhide. There's lots of packages for specific hardware
in Fedora and these devices run Fedora.
Peter
Additionally, having OLPC-specific RPMS in mainline Fedora helps with
the end goal that is , as I understand it, to have OLPC's OS be
essentially a Spin of stock Fedora. It also helps OLPC devs who don't
necessarily have XOs.
--
in your fear, seek only peace
in your fear, seek only love
-d. bowie