From Bugzilla Helper: User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.7.9) Gecko/20050710 Description of problem: I'm think FC4-x86_64-SRPMS-disc1.iso FC4-x86_64-SRPMS-disc2.iso FC4-x86_64-SRPMS-disc3.iso FC4-x86_64-SRPMS-disc4.iso and FC4-i386-SRPMS-disc1.iso FC4-i386-SRPMS-disc2.iso FC4-i386-SRPMS-disc3.iso FC4-i386-SRPMS-disc4.iso contain the same files and extracted on most mirrors into directory SRPMS. - are that really need to make 2 types of SRPMS disc images ? Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): How reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1.look at any mirror Expected Results: one SRPMS distribution place FC4-SRPMS-disc[1-4].iso Additional info:
Good question, Jeremy or Elliot?
This is done entirely by builddistro. It's not obvious or easy as the trees are composed entirely separately and the set of SRPMs is not identical across arches.
Even though the set of SRPMS may not be the same, the ones that are common, they should be the same no? Why then would it matter if the ones used per arch differ? The unified set could just contain them all.
Agreed, simply contain all in the unified SRPM discs.
also .spec files may be rewrited to unified form - this possibility exist (conditional compilation on architecture). Or sources of packages (not spec files - but real sources) is modified per arch?
distill has been modified to accomplish this. FC5 Test3 was released this way.