noarch subpackages

[yersinia]

On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 5:07 PM, Rick L. Vinyard, Jr.
<rvinyard at cs.nmsu.edu>wrote:

> Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > On Wed, 8 Jul 2009 07:59:43 -0600, Jr. wrote:
> >
> >> What is the effect on non-Fedora and older distributions (pre F10) if I
> >> mark a subpackage (such as documentation) with BuildArch: noarch?
> >
> > You can evaluate the %fedora variable to use this new feature only
> > for Fedora >= 10:
> >
> > %if 0%{?fedora} > 9
> > BuildArch: noarch
> > %endif
> >
>
> Excellent. That's what I was looking for.
>

No, it is not right for me. The BuildArch issue depends on the RPM version
and not from from distro version. It is simply bad style, IMHO, defining
in the SPEC file something that depends from the "distribution" (in the
large sense not only fedora). I never see
this style in RHEL package (appart some little package for the rpm keys
ecc). Ok is SUSE yes but, again, i don't like define a dependency based on
a "distro" version, if possible anyway.

regards

>
> --
> fedora-devel-list mailing list
> fedora-devel-list at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20090709/71521d6f/attachment.html