We have built 96% of F17, with approximately 85 packages missing and 188 missing builds (this including many packages that have 1 or more builds in between what we have versus PA). Here is the full list: http://arm.koji.fedoraproject.org/status/f17-missing-2012-05-30.cgi

On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 2:52 PM, Paul Whalen <pwhalen(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > We have built 96% of F17, with > approximately 85 packages missing and 188 missing builds (this > including many > packages that have 1 or more builds in between what we have versus > PA). Here is the full list: > http://arm.koji.fedoraproject.org/status/f17-missing-2012-05-30.cgi > > Is this an apples-to-apples comparison of packages between the arm repositories and the f17 "fedora" repository? Or are you taking into account packages that don't build for arm due to exclusivearch/excludearch, and all of the packages that depend on them?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAk/GmQoACgkQkSxm47BaWfcVkwCeJ/eI7f2sxdQjCQr70BmlCHsX HIsAnRg9fxdZCJrMHF/LP7wGOkOHCbJx =XyMC -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 El Wed, 30 May 2012 14:52:20 -0400 (EDT) Paul Whalen <pwhalen(a)redhat.com&gt; escribió: > Good day all, > > As many of you are aware we are not holding the Fedora ARM meeting > this week, but shall return to our regular time next Wednesday June > 6th. > > Congratulations to the primary architectures for their GA release of > Fedora 17 on May 29th. With the successful release of the Fedora 17 > Beta for ARM last week, its now time to turn our attention to the GA > release and what is currently blocking our progress. We have built > 96% of F17, with approximately 85 packages missing and 188 missing > builds (this including many packages that have 1 or more builds in > between what we have versus PA). Here is the full list: > http://arm.koji.fedoraproject.org/status/f17-missing-2012-05-30.cgi > > Work is still under way on the kernel for the Pandaboard, but all > other release criteria from our Alpha and Beta have been met. Please > take a moment to review the criteria for the final here: > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures/ARM/Quality_Assurance/Final_R... > > Let's begin the discussion on the list - What do you foresee blocking > us from our final release of F17? As i see it for ga release we need to have the 85 older builds built at the same or newer nvr as primary. we need to have a working kernel on pandaboard, ideally that includes working omapdrm. all blocker bugs resolved and qa test matrices to be complete.

There's one addition I would like to see to the final release criteria: Updated linker path in gcc and glibc.

* the compat symlink on its own isn't enough, changing the filename means the soname has changed too.

2 reasons: * it would be nice if people using Fedora create binaries using the right path for the future * the compat symlink on its own isn't enough, changing the filename means the soname has changed too. There's a (quick and very dirty) glibc patch to make things work regardless - see [1]