Paul Howarth wrote: > Neal Becker wrote: >> Jeremy Katz wrote: >> >>> Neal Becker wrote: >>>> What should I do about this? >>>> >>>> qct-mercurial.noarch: E: >>>> noarch-python-in-64bit-path >>>> /usr/lib64/python2.5/site-packages/hgext/qct.pyc >>>> >>>> I think qct.py needs to go there, because that's where mercurial is >>>> going to >>>> look. As we discussed before, our multi-arch python is somewhat >>>> broken, because you cannot have both /usr/lib/python/.../some_package >>>> and /usr/lib64/python/.../some_package. It will only search one of >>>> those >>>> locations. So we cannot have both arch and nonarch site-packages/hgext >>>> - unless maybe I'm misunderstanding something? >>> If it needs to be in the arch-specific path, the package needs to be >>> built for the native arch and not noarch >>> >>> Jeremy >>> >> >> So qct will build 2 packages, a no-arch qct and an arch qct-mercurial, is >> that correct? >> >> Can anyone point me to an example of an rpm spec file that does this, I'm >> not sure of the syntax? > > Just build the whole lot as arch packages; all of the python-twisted-* > stack (which is mostly noarch) is built as arch-specific packages for > this reason. > > Paul. > This will trigger: rpmlint RPM/RPMS/x86_64/qct-1.5-4.fc8.x86_64.rpm qct.x86_64: E: no-binary I believe this is ignorable? -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
