[Fedora-packaging] arched BuildRequires?

Toshio Kuratomi a.badger at gmail.com
Fri Jun 14 16:27:25 UTC 2013

On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 03:29:25PM +0300, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> Actually its not even the source repository layout which is broken
> (it'd be insane to duplicate all the source for every arch just
> because src.rpm headers differ between arches), its the assumption
> that the metadata from such a repository can meaningfully be used for
> evaluating build-requires that is broken.
> While we're at this (again): there are no guarantees that even the
> payload of an src.rpm is arch-independent, its trivial to create
> constructs where included sources and patches differ depending on
> what architecture an src.rpm was built. If people are worrying about
> src.rpm arch independence, THAT is what should be banned in the
> guidelines.
<nod>  That sounds like a good thing regardless of the rest of the
discussion and unlike contemplating conditionals on BuildRequires, there
should be no place where conditionals on payload is needed (the conditional
logic can be moved to %prep where the pieces of the payload are used

Created a proposed draft here: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/306

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/packaging/attachments/20130614/47862952/attachment.sig>

More information about the packaging mailing list