On Sun, 2007-02-04 at 16:21 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > 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. If what you say applies, something is very broken in the buildsystem. 1. Noarch is the architecture a package had been designed for, not the architecture a package actually runs on and doesn't have to imply a package is usable on a certain arch. 2. A noarch package can depend on arch'ed packages, which might not be available for all arches - Nevertheless the package itself is still noarch. Ralf -- 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
