On Sun, 4 Feb 2007 09:52:56 -0500, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Saturday 03 February 2007 18:08, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > BuildArch: noarch
> > ExcludeArch: ppc
> >
> >
> > [In comparison, the Extras push script examines the src.rpm for the
> > ExcludeArch tag and doesn't push such noarch packages to the excluded
> > target repos. That is something that has been said is done for Core,
> > too. IIRC, either jkatz or sopwith has said that.]
>
> I'd really like to start discussion again on stop calling these
> things 'noarch' when they aren't 'noarch'. If your package doesn't work on
> other arches, it can't be noarch. It either needs to no-op on other arches,
> or not be noarch. I'm really tired of having to play games with digging at a
> sourcerpm to figure out what arches a package is suitable for, since this
> information isn't carried forward in the resultant rpm. We either need to
> fix rpm so that this information is carried forward, or just stop calling
> these things noarch.
That would make some packaging scenarios impossible, unfortunately.
E.g. noarch [data/script/plugin/backend] packages, which are useless
without their arch-specific main programs.
When we faced this topic in Extras and FESCo, nobody showed any interest
in it.
--- Begin forwarded message:
From: Michael Schwendt
To: fesco
Subject: ExcludeArch for noarch (was: Re: nx requires and provides)
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 23:32:43 +0200
In-Reply-To: <448A7CBD.9080402@xxxxxxxxx>
X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.6 (GTK+ 2.8.18; i386-redhat-linux-gnu)
On Sat, 10 Jun 2006 12:13:24 -0400, Jeremy Katz wrote:
> On Sat, 2006-06-10 at 01:03 -0700, Rick Stout wrote:
> > First, nx *does not* work on x86_64, so it has an Excludearch: x86_64 in
> > the spec. This is fine for the arch exclusion, but there is a package
> > that depends on nx, freenx which is noarch (its just a bunch of
> > scripts), so the build reports show that freenx has a broken dependency
> > on x86_64. What is the best way to handle this? Can I Excludearch:
> > x86_64 on a noarch package? How about a requires: wrapped in an ifnarch
> > conditional?
>
> The way we handle this with Core at the moment is an ExcludeArch in the
> noarch package and then the tree composition scripts use that to say
> "no, don't pull this package into the $arch tree". Similar in the
> Extras scripts may well make a lot of sense.
Done.
[However, I cannot get excludearch information from the noarch rpm, but
only from the srcrpm. "rpm" itself also returns "(none)" when querying
ExcludeArch noarch packages with querytag %{excludearch} and succeeds
only for src.rpm files.]
Shall we turn this on in the push script?
--- End forwarded message
--
Fedora-maintainers mailing list
Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers
--
Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list
Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly
