Michal Marek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm wondering - doesn't RPM support creating anyarch + noarch
> subpackages in one build simply because it has never had the feature in
> first place and no-one implemented it so far (for backwards
> compatibility reasons perhaps)? Or are there good reasons not to allow this?
Jeff Johnson has been talking about this lately:
So an implementation permitting noarch (or any
other arch) sub-packages is quite feasible, always
has been, an easy hack.
http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg02055.html
http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg00211.html
but afaik this doesn't mention how to precise this in spec file.
for the record, instead of %_noarch_packages, we could use BuildArch
and still be backward compatible (as far as i have tested...):
- force "BuildArch: %_target_cpu" in main package
- add "BuildArch: noarch" to sub-packages which should be noarch
since currently rpm takes the first BuildArch
(tested on rpm 4.4.2.3 and 4.4.8)
_______________________________________________
Rpm-maint mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
