[ATrpms-users] Request for testing new mythtv build setup

[Keith C]

On Nov 16, 2006, at 1:08 PM, Axel Thimm wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 16, 2006 at 11:13:53AM -0600, Keith C wrote:
>> On Nov 16, 2006, at 5:27 AM, Axel Thimm wrote:
>>> On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 08:36:21AM +0100, Axel Thimm wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Nov 09, 2006 at 09:08:30PM +0100, Axel Thimm wrote:
>>>>> I've been asked to regularily offer trunk packages in a designated
>>>>> area (e.g. the bleeding section). [...]
>>>>> But since the advent of fixes branches the core package need to be
>>>>> rebuilt each time just the same, so some of the reasons melt
>>>>> away, and
>>>>> the new arguments for keeping it all under one src.rpm change the
>>>>> balance.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, what do you think? Merge mythtv and mythplugins into one  
>>>>> build?
>>>>
>>>> Please test the merged builds at http://atrpms.net/name/mythtv-new/
>>>
>>> Extending to the user list: Please test the packages in the URL  
>>> above
>>> (or activate atrpms-testing). They should be functional equal to the
>>> builds in atrpms-stable, please confirm. If not, then there is a bug
>>> in the build setup somewhere - the sources are otherwise  
>>> identical (on
>>> purpose), e.g. no new bug fixes from the fixes branch.
>>> -- 
>>
>> Not sure I follow the discussion here completely.  Is this the merged
>> build, the from trunk build, or is it both?
>
> No, no trunk build, yet. This is the merged build that will then be
> used for both stable and trunk versions. If built in one sweep there
> will never be a build-time overlap between the two myths and the
> install-time ambiguity is resolved by placing them in different repos
> (stable vs testing/bleeding).
>

I noticed a trunk build has appeared in bleeding for FC6.  As some of  
the newer stuff shows up in SVN, I'm getting tempted to jump.   
Storage groups in particular look interesting.  And the stream from  
remote backend option just added is necessary for one of my frontends.

Is there a regular build schedule for trunk?  I'm probably going to  
hold off until I'm ready to move my FC5 backend to FC6 and 2.6.19 at  
the same time.

Keith C