https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1273579 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |POST Flags| |fedora-review+ --- Comment #26 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx> --- So I went on a longish roundabout hike after looking an the Provides and ended up filing #1618949 and #1618951. It seems that this package is not at fault, but the automatic dependency generator is too eager in one case and not eager enough in another. > Should we exclude some arches? If you *have* to, for example because they aren't supported upstream or tests fail or whatever, then sure. But otherwise, everything should be compiled for all architectures. You're right that arm probably isn't an option, but somebody might be running small stuff on a chromebook. Arm64 is also getting more viable. Looks all good to me. I gave it some light testing, and everything seems to work fine. I already listed license and other checks above in #c23. Package is APPROVED. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list -- package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/message/SVFWVAKIP4XAC7LTWMA4FECEZRSKNCMN/
