[PlanetCCRMA] State of Fedora 26 repo

bernardobarros at gmail.com bernardobarros at gmail.com
Tue Oct 24 18:08:46 PDT 2017

On Sun, 2017-10-22 at 12:00 -0700, Fernando Lopez-Lezcano wrote:
> I don't think there are any licensing issues. At some point I think 
> there was a problem with boost as SC needed its own version (and
> Fedora 
> does not like that, you have to link with existing libraries instead
> of 
> using a different one).

I don't think that's a good idea. Even sc developers don't know for
sure what can go wrong with a boost lib update. 

I think an independent repository will always be necessary for such
cases, and for the realtime kernel.

More information about the PlanetCCRMA mailing list