On Monday, 05 September 2022 at 21:42, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > 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)? Change %autosetup to plain %setup and apply the patch conditionally instead of conditionally including it in the SRPM. Regards, Dominik -- Fedora https://getfedora.org | RPM Fusion http://rpmfusion.org There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and oppression to develop psychic muscles. -- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan _______________________________________________ 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
