On Fri, 06 Mar 2009 12:27:00 -0500, Tom wrote:
> On 03/06/2009 12:25 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Laurent Rineau laurent.rineau__fedora@normalesup writes:
> >> On Friday 06 March 2009 17:41:34 James Antill wrote:
> >>> ...the "majority" of cases where it's a problem are things that have
> >>> deps. on *-devel pkgs. Esp. if you have pkgA-devel requires pkgB-devel,
> >>> usually the only way to do that is via. an explicit requires on
> >>> pkgB-devel%{_isa}.
> >
> >> Is that explained somewhere in the packaging guidelines? I have made the error
> >> several time. Actually, I did not know %{_isa} before reading the current
> >> thread.
> >
> > If true, this is completely horrid --- this means every single package I
> > own is broken, and probably 75% of everything else is too. Can't we get
> > this fixed in RPM, rather than having to kluge it in the specfiles?
>
> RPM already tracks architecture for detected library dependencies. This
> really only comes into play for BuildRequires that could reasonably be
> multilib and any hardcoded library requires. So, not 75% of packages.
> More like 2%.
Hmm, "BuildRequires"?
Arch-specific BuildRequires?!
Or how are you meant to be understood?
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
