On 1/14/06, Roozbeh Pournader <roozbeh@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >From what I have learned searching the web, it seems that using a single > spec file to build one noarch subpackage and another arch-specific one > in a single is impossible. Is that right, or I was misled? Assuming I > was right in deducing so, I have questions regarding the packaging of > MediaWiki. You are correct, you cannot have sub-packages as different archs within the same context and have a one pass rpmbuild generate them. You can hack a .spec to have multiple archs via %ifarch; however, this requires multiple passes of rpmbuild to get all packages built. For example, kernel does this for documentation. > > The package is mostly straight-forward PHP, but also includes a certain > feature for handling mathematical formulas (that is turned off in the > default configuration). That feature is implemented as a binary, and has > dependencies on LaTeX, dvips, and ImageMagick, which have large > dependencies themselves. > > I tried packaging the formula support as a subpackage, but I can't > make the main package noarch and the -math subpackage arch-dependent. I > have three choices: > > 1) Get along with an arch-independent RPM package marked as > arch-dependent. > > 2) Forget subpackages and make them one RPM with unified dependencies. You could pick this if: 1) it doesn't take much space, and 2) most user's will use the component anyway. > 3) Make these two different SPEC files. (This would create a burden on > me for maintaining the two in sync, so I guess I should only do this if > the other two options are unacceptable.) > > What do you think I should do? Or am I missing a fourth and better path? The fourth would be to consider a two pass scenario. I'm not willing to say it's better though. -- -jeff -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
