Hi,
A number of packages have multilib header file wrappers such as
this one (blkid_types.h from e2fsprogs):
/* This file is here to prevent a file conflict on multiarch systems. A
* conflict will occur because blkid_types.h has arch-specific definitions.
*
* DO NOT INCLUDE THE NEW FILE DIRECTLY -- ALWAYS INCLUDE THIS ONE INSTEAD. */
#if defined(__i386__)
#include "blkid_types-i386.h"
#elif defined(__ia64__)
#include "blkid_types-ia64.h"
#elif defined(__powerpc64__)
#include "blkid_types-ppc64.h"
#elif defined(__powerpc__)
#include "blkid_types-ppc.h"
#elif defined(__s390x__)
#include "blkid_types-s390x.h"
#elif defined(__s390__)
#include "blkid_types-s390.h"
#elif defined(__x86_64__)
#include "blkid_types-x86_64.h"
#elif defined(__alpha__)
#include "blkid_types-alpha.h"
#else
#error "This e2fsprogs-devel package does not work your architecture?"
#endif
It seems that most of such header files are (directly or indirectly)
copied from some original example that didn't test for ARM, and so,
a couple of examples in the distro right now lack the proper definitions
for ARM, causing ARM to end up with unusable -devel packages.
On ARM, the preprocessor symbol __arm__ is defined, and %{_arch} is
set to 'arm', so something like this will work:
#if defined(__i386__)
#include "blkid_types-i386.h"
+#elif defined(__arm__)
+#include "blkid_types-arm.h"
#elif defined(__ia64__)
#include "blkid_types-ia64.h"
#elif defined(__powerpc64__)
If you have such a construct in your package, please consider adding
the relevant __arm__ bits.
thanks,
Lennert
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
