Fedora Desktop on XO

[Reuben K. Caron]

Peter Robinson wrote:
> Hi Chris,
>
>   
>>   > I would remove the old fc9 build from the olpc_development repo (or
>>   > even have one for 8.2.0 and one for 9.1.0 so they don't get mixed
>>   > up).  Surely it should be pulling cyrus-sasl from the Fedora repos
>>   > anyway?
>>
>> I've just pushed a patch to pilgrim's joyride branch to switch the
>> baseurl that gets written out in /etc/yum.repos.d/olpc-development.repo
>> from http://xs-dev.laptop.org/~cscott/repos/dist-olpc3-devel/ to
>> http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/static-repos/dist-olpc4-build-current/i386/
>>
>> (olpc3 is our 8.2/F9 repo, and olpc4 is the 9.1/F10 repo, so Joyride
>> should have been switched to write out the olpc4 baseurl when we
>> created the new repo.)
>>
>> And, after the change, we don't have depsolving problems any more!
>> Here's the list of packages to be downloaded -- the next question is
>> going to be how to avoid many of these dependencies.  Perhaps instead
>> of trying the groupinstall, we should be hand-picking a smaller base
>> of GNOME packages from this list?
>>     
>
> Well its the list up to the "Installing for dependencies" that is
> explicitly requested, all the below is pulled in for deps. I'm not
> sure how pilgrim builds the list but I think if it uses kickstart like
> the other fedora build systems do you should be able to do a specific
> "-packagename" and its removed from the list.
>
>   
Does pilgrim (Puritan?) use "kickstart" like files? If so, how? If not, 
why do we not create builds using what seems to be fedora's standard 
build system?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20090106/3b69bfc7/attachment.html>