On Tuesday 10 November 2009 08:15:58 pm BJ Dierkes wrote: > On Nov 10, 2009, at 9:56 AM, Steve Traylen wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 4:51 PM, Manuel Wolfshant > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Farkas Levente wrote: > >>> hi, > >>> what's the proper way to distinguish epel from fedora in the spec > >>> file? > >>> i'd like to add > >>> ExcludeArch: ppc ppc64 > >>> on epel but not in case of fedora in a package (since there is no > >>> java > >>> on ppc on epel). but what's the current recommended way to do so? > >>> unfortunately %{?rhel} is not defined even in rhel-5 so what else > >>> can i > > Is there any problem with: > > %if %{el5} > ExcludeArch: ppc ppc64 > %endif yes nothing defines %{el5} and you would get a failure on all targets the correct way to handle it would be
%if 0%{?rhel} > 1
ExcludeArch: ppc ppc64
%endif
though we do not build epel ppc64
Dennis
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ epel-devel-list mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list
