I have a question regarding the use of ExclusiveArch.

At https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures#ExcludeArch_.26_ExclusiveArch
it says that only packages which are exclusively architecture-specific should
use ExclusiveArch. Is it appropriate to extend this to packages which aren't
architecture-specific themselves, but which depend on a package that is
available only on some architectures?

The reason why I'm asking is that some packages with Ada code which I maintain
can't be built on architectures where Gnat, the Ada compiler, is unavailable,
and apparently this annoys the people who work on secondary architectures. The
proposed workaround is to add ExclusiveArch entries to the Ada packages,
listing the architectures where the gcc-gnat package is available, and then
update those entries when someone manages to bootstrap Gnat on a new
architecture. I'd like to know if this use of ExclusiveArch is acceptable, or
if I'll run the risk of being told that it's against the rules and must be
removed.

Björn Persson
--
packaging mailing list
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging

On 01/24/2011 12:38 AM, Björn Persson wrote:
> I have a question regarding the use of ExclusiveArch.
>
> At https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures#ExcludeArch_.26_ExclusiveArch
> it says that only packages which are exclusively architecture-specific should
> use ExclusiveArch. Is it appropriate to extend this to packages which aren't
> architecture-specific themselves, but which depend on a package that is
> available only on some architectures?
>
> The reason why I'm asking is that some packages with Ada code which I maintain
> can't be built on architectures where Gnat, the Ada compiler, is unavailable,
> and apparently this annoys the people who work on secondary architectures. The
> proposed workaround is to add ExclusiveArch entries to the Ada packages,
> listing the architectures where the gcc-gnat package is available, and then
> update those entries when someone manages to bootstrap Gnat on a new
> architecture. I'd like to know if this use of ExclusiveArch is acceptable, or
> if I'll run the risk of being told that it's against the rules and must be
> removed.

imho it could be a solution, but unfortunately rh and fedora think it's
differently:-( since if the package is noarch then koji can send it to
any builder (even if you have exclusicearch:-() so your package wont
compile sometime...

ps. the same happened with me with gstreamer-java when ppc version of
java always crash. and i ask it a few year ago.. that's the only reason
why gstreamer-java is not noarch:-((

--
Levente "Si vis pacem para bellum!"
--
packaging mailing list
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging

Farkas Levente wrote:
> if the package is noarch then koji can send it to
> any builder (even if you have exclusicearch:-() so your package wont
> compile sometime...

These packages aren't noarch, so that's not the problem in this case. Gnat
complies Ada to machine code.

Björn Persson
--
packaging mailing list
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging

On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 12:38:14AM +0100, Björn Persson wrote:
> I have a question regarding the use of ExclusiveArch.
>
> At
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures#ExcludeArch_.26_ExclusiveArch
> it says that only packages which are exclusively
> architecture-specific should use ExclusiveArch. Is it appropriate to
> extend this to packages which aren't architecture-specific
> themselves, but which depend on a package that is available only on
> some architectures?

Common sense says it's fine.

Adding ExclusiveArch is what we do for OCaml packages (mainly because
I don't have time or access to S/390 etc to get the bytecode compiler
working properly).

Rich.

--
Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
virt-p2v converts physical machines to virtual machines. Boot with a
live CD or over the network (PXE) and turn machines into Xen guests.
http://et.redhat.com/~rjones/virt-p2v
--
packaging mailing list
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging

Am 24.01.2011 09:50, schrieb Richard W.M. Jones:
> On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 12:38:14AM +0100, Björn Persson wrote:
>> I have a question regarding the use of ExclusiveArch.
>>
>> At
>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures#ExcludeArch_.26_ExclusiveArch
>> it says that only packages which are exclusively
>> architecture-specific should use ExclusiveArch. Is it appropriate to
>> extend this to packages which aren't architecture-specific
>> themselves, but which depend on a package that is available only on
>> some architectures?
>
> Common sense says it's fine.
>
> Adding ExclusiveArch is what we do for OCaml packages (mainly because
> I don't have time or access to S/390 etc to get the bytecode compiler
> working properly).
>
> Rich.
>



Just ping Dan Horak or me when you need access to our mainframe.
Finding some time for it will probably be a bigger hurdle for you ;-)

Karsten
--
packaging mailing list
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging