On Wednesday 12 July 2006 06:14, Michael Schwendt wrote: > Else it would be abuse of tags. The only vaguely valid case is combining > BuildArch noarch and ExcludeArch, which is like saying "by nature, the > package contents are arch-independent, but we know that there is a problem > on the N excluded archs". How far do you take this though? ExcludeArch: ppc ppc64 s390 s390x alpha sparc sparc64 ia64 arm ..... It starts to get silly when you have to guess at the arches that somebody may attempt to install your package for. Why would 'ExcludeArch' be ok, but 'ExclusiveArch' not be? ExclusiveArch says "I know it _only_ works here, nowhere else." where as ExcludeArch would be "These are the arches out in the world I know of, and I know it doesn't work there." I agree that we are overloading the tag. But if we're going to ban one method, we should ban them all and make it a hard rule that if your noarch code only works on specific arches, make it an arch specific package. -- Jesse Keating Release Engineer: Fedora
Attachment:
pgp2AJ8PkFPWo.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
