> > Pure managed code such as ndesk-dbus should not need a
> rebuild, thus I
> > was also surprised to find them on the list.
>
> If it's pure managed code then why is it in an arch-specific
> package?
>
> Because the guidelines for packaging Mono are IMHO broken, we do this
> to enable AOT after the fact, I have at least one upstream complaining
> loudly over this and personally I'm rather tired of patching the
> libdir stuff by hand.
The upstream author for my package applied the change from /usr/lib to
%{_libdir} into the sources, because at least Ubuntu should use the same
schema.
> Would anyone oppose making that demand optional? As more and more code
> is becoming pure managed it would greatly reduce the work required to
> maintain these packages if we could be allowed to package them as
> noarch. Less patching, closer to upstream.. all that good stuff and I
> wouldn't be pulling out my hair everytime I feel like I'm writing yet
> another mindless patch that will never go upstream.
Dan
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
