FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 11-14-2008, 10:37 PM
Farkas Levente
 
Default RFC: definition of noarch

Farkas Levente wrote:
> Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
>> Actually, the problem is pretty clear: you simply cannot do what
>> you're trying to do.
>>
>> If your package won't even build on PPC, it simply can't be noarch.
>> The ExcludeArch: case for noarch packages is for those with runtime
>> dependencies that aren't available for all architectures. That's not
>> the case you're seeing.
>>
>> Your options are either to wait until the JRE bug is fixed or make
>> your package arch-specific.
>
> no it's not that easy. the question is:
> what the noarch means?
> - it should have to be run on any arch?
> or
> - it should have to be run _AND_ build on any arch?
> this package is a pure java package which is noarch the the result
> gstreamer-java-1.0-1.fc10.noarch.rpm can be run on any arch,
> BUT as there is a bug in #468831 in
> java-1.6.0-openjdk on ppc it can't be compiled on ppc.
> so if eg. there is a bug in python compiler or in the python interpreter
> on ppc then the python packages no longer noarch packages?

ok so according to the comment in
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=471602
the bug is in my definition of noarch:-(

but as i'm not agree with you, the only thing what can i do to try to
change this rules:-)

according to your definition:
- a noarch package can't contain ExcludeArch in it's spec file (if it's
really the case it should have to be documented and put into rpmlint).
- if a package can build on i386, x86_64 then (even if it's not an arch
dependent package) should have to be i386, x86_64 packages. or otherwise
we've to wait (may be even years) to be fixed the compiler or the
runtime or ... on ppc.
- and then an i386 package can be repackage as noarch!?

what will happened if more archs from secondary architectures (arm,
ia64, s390, sparc) will be added to fedora's primary arch? then we've to
wait for all bugs in all arch independent language's compiler, runtime,
interpreter, etc. for a noarch packages?

imho: the definition of noarch should have to be:
- can be build and run on all arch except on the ExcludeArch's arch.

imho: the koji should have to work as:
all package should have to be build on it own arch and if it's noarch
then it can be build on any buildhost if it's arch not among the
ExcludeArch's arch.


--
Levente "Si vis pacem para bellum!"

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 07:20 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org