On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 11:10 PM, Rex Dieter <rdieter(a)math.unl.edu> wrote:
Alexander Ploumistos wrote:
> I am asking because the rpm documentation leaves quite a lot to be
> desired. If I went and changed all my "Requires: foo" to "Requires:
> foo%{_isa}" in all my non-noarch packages, would I be plain wrong, or
> is it justifiable - albeit an overkill?
the only place I recall seeing recommendation to use %{_isa} is in subpkg
dependencies.
IMO, It's wrong to use in general, unless you have good reason to do so. Do
you?
Well, if I did, I'd know why it was a good reason and we wouldn't be
having this conversation :)
Another alternative: don't make -devel depend on the main package
(which is
ok for headers-only situations like this)
That's a good point to discuss with the upstream developer as well,
because I think he intends the libraries to be shipped (and work) that
way.
Thank you for all that Rex!