Re: ATrpms Real Issues

• To: fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
• Subject: Re: ATrpms Real Issues
• From: "Neal D. Becker" <ndbecker2@xxxxxxxxxxx>
• Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 10:34:26 -0500
• List-archive: <https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list>
• List-help: <mailto:[email protected]?subject=help>
• List-id: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list.redhat.com>
• List-post: <mailto:[email protected]>
• List-subscribe: <http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list>, <mailto:[email protected]?subject=subscribe>
• List-unsubscribe: <http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list>, <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
• References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
• Reply-to: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
• Sender: news <news@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
• User-agent: KNode/0.8.2

Axel Thimm wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 06, 2005 at 09:54:13AM -0500, Neal D. Becker wrote:
>> I really appreciate atrpms.  I do have 1 issue with them (at least, IIRC
>> is is ATrpms that have this problem).
>> 
>> Since I'm using x86_64, I often need to build from srpms.
> 
> ATrpms does have x86_64 support for FC2 and FC3.
> 

Yeah, it does _now_ :)

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: ATrpms Real Issues
    • From: Axel Thimm

• References:
  • ATrpms Real Issues
    • From: Temlakos
  • Re: ATrpms Real Issues
    • From: Neal D. Becker
  • Re: ATrpms Real Issues
    • From: Axel Thimm

• Prev by Date: Re: Which One?
• Next by Date: Re: How do you know?
• Previous by thread: Re: ATrpms Real Issues
• Next by thread: Re: ATrpms Real Issues
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread