On Sun, Feb 04, 2007 at 09:52:56AM -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. Well in the case of 'python-virtinst' the package itself works just fine on ppc, and being pure python noarch is the right thing. We only had to add in the ExcludeArch: ppc stuff because one of the packages it depends on (libvirt) is not available on ppc. I don't see that we should switch the package to be arch dependnant in this case. The build tools should be able to figure out that a dependant package is not available on ppc and automatically skip this python-virtinst, whether its noarch or not. Dan. -- |=- Red Hat, Engineering, Emerging Technologies, Boston. +1 978 392 2496 -=| |=- Perl modules: http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ -=| |=- Projects: http://freshmeat.net/~danielpb/ -=| |=- GnuPG: 7D3B9505 F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 -=| -- 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
