Axel Thimm (Axel.Thimm@xxxxxxxxxx) said: > On Fri, Mar 17, 2006 at 02:07:13PM -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote: > > Axel Thimm (Axel.Thimm@xxxxxxxxxx) said: > > > while putting together these src.rpms under one folder was a good > > > thing, it uncovers an issue with conditional and macro-dependent > > > BuildRequires, i.e. they become static and reveal the arch in nasty > > > ways. > > > > Huh? These are the same SRPMS as always; there is no difference to > > how they are generated with respect to previous releases, only in > > how the ISOs were generated. > > either the issue wasn't present until now (no arch hardconding in > BuildRequires before FC5), or nobody noticed. Almost certainly the latter. The source RPMs shipped have always been identical across architecture; if you want to process the buildreqs, use the spec. Or have a package that Provides: anytihng not available on that arch as a build req. Bill -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
