https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2292522 --- Comment #7 from Fabio Valentini <decathorpe@xxxxxxxxx> --- Thank you for the thorough review! > Is it because "supported-arches" there would be used for the whole crate, because the crate as a whole wouldn't work, > while here it would have to be used only for a subpackage of the crate, because only this subpackage makes no sense? > I would assume that's impossible to filter it out from the rpm point of view, however it's still doable to package it friction less thanks to the following note (...) Yeah. supported-arches only affects which architectures a crate is built on and where tests are run. It doesn't affect the package contents at all. Packages that have "BuildArch: noarch" also aren't filtered out by architecture (they are supposed to be architecture-independent after all), so there's not much that can be done here. -- 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=2292522 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202292522%23c7 -- _______________________________________________ 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
