Matthew Woehlke wrote:
Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Fri, 14 Nov 2008 14:45:57 -0500, David Huff wrote:
Michael Schwendt wrote:
Broken packages in fedora-updates-testing-9-ppc64:
appliance-tools-002.6-1.fc9.noarch requires qemu-img
To address this I added "ExclusiveArch: %{ix86} x86_64 ppc alpha
sparc armv4l noarch", to the spec [1] which matches the qemu
package. I was told that this would prevent the compose tools form
adding the appliance-tools rpm to the ppc64 tree.
Why not "ExcludeArch: ppc64"?
Just to offer an outside perspective... IMO ExcludeArch makes sense when
a package is generically expected to work, but is known to have problems
on specific architectures (i.e. not working is the exception, not the
rule). For things like qemu (or valgrind, to give another example) that
are highly arch-specific, it makes more sense to list the arches that
are supported, even if that results in a longer list.
either way, it was my understanding that both ExclusinveArch and
ExcludeArch would work, ie the compose tools will check the srpm and not
include the package in a tree if specified in either of these feilds.
Im not sure if switching form ExclusinveArch to ExcludeArch will fix the
issue at had.
Any comments, as I would like to run a new build to try and resolve this
issue.
-D
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
