I have a downstream patch[0] which -- I don't really understand why -- breaks riscv64 builds but is necessary for primary Fedora arches. Is it correct to do: %ifnarch riscv64 Patch123: downstream.patch %endif given that the package uses %autosetup and therefore doesn't have explicit %patch lines. I think this means that if I build the SRPM on riscv64 then the downstream patch wouldn't be included, meaning that SRPM would then fail to build on other arches. In this particular case that doesn't matter, but it feels wrong. Is there a recommended way to do this (apart from fixing the patch)? Rich. [0] https://pagure.io/fedora-ocaml/c/41d5e2db7a4667560d6aedda11a3c6a80c8f1b83?branch=fedora-37-4.14.0 -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com libguestfs lets you edit virtual machines. Supports shell scripting, bindings from many languages. http://libguestfs.org _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
