kindling the issue, but I'm building an arm buildchain myself right now.
On Fri, 16 Jun 2006, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> I can see three choices:
>
> 1) Ignore the enduser confusion and go with Ralf's naming:
> i386-rtems4.7-binutils-2.16.1-0.20051229.1.fc6.i386.rpm
>
> 2) Namespace the whole thing:
> cross-i386-rtems4.7-binutils-2.16.1-0.20051229.1.fc6.i386.rpm
>
> 3) Play games with the '-' to avoid the "it's an rpm separator"
> association:
> i386_rtems4.7_binutils-2.16.1-0.20051229.1.fc6.i386.rpm
>
> FWIW, I think #2 has the most precedent.
What about reshuffling the components a bit?
binutils-i386-arm-%{version}-%{release}.%{dist}.%{target}.rpm?
regards,
andreas
--
Fedora-packaging mailing list
Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
