Taskotron depcheck question

[Petr Pisar]

On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 08:23:38PM -0500, Scott Talbert wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Nov 2014, Petr Pisar wrote:
> 
> >>>As far as I know alternative-architecture multi-lib packages are
> >>>distributed in the same repository as packages for the main
> >>>architectue. E.g. glibc-devel.i686 is in x86_64 repository, hence
> >>>glibc-devel is mutlilib. glibc-headers.i686 is not in the the x86_64,
> >>>hence glibc-headers is not multi-lib.
> >>
> >>Yeah, but the thing that's bugging me about this now that I'm digging
> >>into it more is that miniz-devel.i686 is installable on f20 via dnf and
> >>yum.
> >>
> >I sent a question why miniz is flagged as multi-lib to the
> ><rel-eng at lists.fedoraproject.org> and it's waiting on the moderator now. Once
> >it propagates, I will take down a pointer here.
> 
> Did you ever find out why miniz was flagged as multi-lib?
> 
No. I sent on November 6th an e-mail to rel-eng mailing list, got a message it
waits for a moderator and then no reply. Obviously the Fedora's one-man
rel-eng team does not manage the mailing list.

However I got similar QA check report
<https://taskotron.fedoraproject.org/taskmaster//builders/x86_64/builds/13277/steps/runtask/logs/stdio>
for pcre
<https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-14639/pcre-8.35-7.fc21>
which never happened before.

I remember from talks with RHEL rel-engs that they mark all '*-devel' packages
as multi-lib just based on the package name. And then they have a lot of
exception hard-coded into the mashing script. So I guess similar situation is
in the Fedora too and that the script is just erroneous in same cases. And
that it's not in line the packaging guidelines which explicitly require that
any *-devel package must require specific architecture.

If the QA check bothers you I would recommend to raise this issue to FESCo.

-- Petr
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 213 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/qa-devel/attachments/20141119/ec16c185/attachment.sig>