On 14. 12. 18 22:38, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On 12/14/18 11:33 AM, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
Hello folks,
for long time we have problem if you have some arch-specific
BuildRequires, you still get one src.rpm from one of arches (not sure
how koji chooses that one) which might not work for your architecture.
For example if you have following in spec:
%ifarch %{ldc_arches}
BuildRequires: ldc
%endif
This is forbidden by guidelines I thought?
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#BuildRequires_and_.25.7B_isa.7D
"You MUST NOT use arched BuildRequires."
That's different. The guideline is against:
# Example of what *not* to do
BuildRequires: foo%{?_isa} >= 3.3
What Igor shows is a pretty common pattern, see for example python3 spec
(simplified):
%ifarch %{valgrind_arches}
BuildRequires: valgrind-devel
%endif
If this was forbidden, there would be no way of BuildRequiring valgrind
or other tools that might be optional but are only available on some
architectures.
On 14. 12. 18 20:33, Igor Gnatenko wrote:> Hello folks,
> 1. make fedora-release archful
> 2. add Provides: system-architecture($arch) to fedora-release, where
> $arch is architecture name
> 3. use Requires: (foo if (system-architecture(x86_64) or
> system-architecture(i686))) in packages
I like 3. But I don't like 1. Is there any other package that is already
archful, and can provide this?
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
