On 11-09-16 19:15, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
On Sunday, 11 September 2016 at 16:40, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> I'd like to talk about the ground rules that Fedora/RISC-V should obey
> for making '%ifarch riscv64'-specific changes to spec files in dist-git.
> I'm aware that no one wants invasive changes to be made (least of all
> me) for the sake of an architecture that isn't generally available and
> isn't even a secondary arch.
> My aim, once we have a pure RPM-built "stage4", is to start auto-
> building all @Core packages as they are built in Koji (either using
> koji-shadow, or similar). Many packages will just work. For others
> it'll be a matter of fixing something and sending it upstream. It's
> the ones where we have to make changes to the spec file to get them to
> build which concern me. Ideally, if the changes are non-invasive, we
> could add them to Fedora which would reduce the differences between
> Fedora/RISC-V and Fedora.
> The question is what things should we be doing or should we not be
> doing, especially w.r.t Fedora spec files in dist-git?
IMHO, if the change is self-contained, follows the conventions
of neighbouring code and doesn't break anything else then just
notify the maintainer, give them a day or two to respond (especially
if it's the weekend) and just go ahead and commit. At least, that's
what you can do with the packages where I'm the POC.
If patching of the upstream code is required, then please add a
reference to a ticket filed with upstream, per our Packaging Guidelines.
Yes that sounds just about right :) +1