Kevin Kofler wrote: > Toshio Kuratomi wrote: >> It's no more dangerous but it is more prone to error. For instance, >> without the ability to make noarch subpackages, header files would be >> included in an arch specific -devel package without question. Now the >> possibility arises to put headers in a noarch subpackage instead so >> packagers need to check that the headers do not contain arch specific >> code. This is an additional piece of information and an additional >> check that packagers will have to know to perform. > > Arch-specific header files cause multilib conflicts and as such need to be > fixed anyway. If noarch subpackages get them noticed quicker, that's a good > thing. > Yep but they'll only get noticed quicker if we check for that. There's currently no checking going on that will catch this. -Toshio
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
