> But this one is important enough that I really want this in mainline rpm,
> since without it, it means regular rpm can't handle an entire distro set of
> packages...
This is a dangerous argument, as by this logic we're required to accept
anything at all that distros come up with.
> I think it's probably something to explore on improving how we do this
> handling, but I think that's a greater refactor than I want to do for this
> particular architecture addition.
...and this argument repeats itself for each new architecture we get. Not to be
taken personally, just noting. But adding more assembler detection is exactly
in the opposite direction of where we want to go, which is why I'm pushing back
so hard on that. Other arch families are merrily using hwcap for these sort of
things, x86 should be able to follow. That's at least in the general direction
of where we want to go on the "going south" level of things.
Oh, and I'm inclined to agree with @berolinux, provided (and required)
capabilities would probably be the more flexible route of looking at this all.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1035#issuecomment-588267461
_______________________________________________
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
