On Sat, Jun 10, 2006 at 08:16:39PM +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > > > But it is impossible not to have such dependencies. Every noarch Perl > > and Python module is going to require Perl or Python. If I package up > > nothing more than a simple shell script it's going to require > > /bin/sh. And its quite easy to think of ways that noarch packages > > might depend on some arch-specific package that won't build on 64-bit > > or PPC or whatever. > > Sorry. I didn't refer to the general case, but to the nx+freenx pair. When > you know that nx is not available on one platform, you cannot (should > not!) make freenx noarch and let it depend on a non-available nx. The right place to hardcode the architectures where package A builds isn't the spec file of an architecture independent package B. Even if the two are related (well, when a package depends on another they are usually related). Package B simply works everywhere where A is availabe and that's all. The real problem is that there is no mechanism to infer the exclusion of B from the unavailability of A and depdndency of B on A (it would be the opposite of the broken dependencies check). Yeti -- Anonyms eat their boogers. -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
