https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2079784 --- Comment #36 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx> --- I was looking extensively into this, and I'll write it up before it all evaporates: - there are two source dist-gits: shim-unsigned-aarch64 and shim-unsigned-x64 (this uses the gnu-efi architecture naming convention). Strangely, those packages use different sources, or more precisely speaking, the same %SOURCE0 but with different patchsets and have different Release. We get binary rpms shim-unsigned-aarch64, shim-unsigned-ia32, shim-unsigned-x64. - I'm not sure how that works exactly, but I assume that the .efi files from the unsigned packages are signed via some web service at MS. - shim has various efi binaries as SourceNN: shimaa64.efi, shimia32.efi, shimx64.efi. I assume they are copied into sources after being signed. It builds arch-specific packages: shim-aa64.aarch64, shim-ia32.x86_64, shim-x64.x86_64. I don't understand why the shim (signed) packages are archful. The package could be noarch and build all subpackages and then we would get shim-aa64.noarch, shim-ia32.noarch, shim-x64.noarch on each architecture. To get such a result with systemd-boot, two approaches would be possible: 1. do what shim does, and copy the files by hand from the unsigned rpms to 'sources'. 2. split the source package into systemd-boot-x86_64 and systemd-boot-aarch64, and make the packages BuildArch:noarch. systemd-boot-x86_64 would build systemd-boot-x64.noarch, systemd-boot-ia32.noarch, and systemd-boot-aarch64 would build systemd-boot-aarch64.noarch. The problem is that the builds would fail if scheduled on the wrong architecture, i.e. we'd need to cancel and repeat the builds until the right arch of builder is encountered. This would be fairly terrible. If koji would allow the build arch for noarch packages to be specified, this approach wouldn't be somewhat better. Neither approach is very attractive :( -- 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 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2079784 _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list -- package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
