> > For backward-compatibility and to avoid surprises, default to building
> > x86_64 even on v2+ capable machines.
> > Tested by running rpm --eval %_target_cpu and using rpmbuild with various
> > BuildArch values on a x86_64_v3 host.
>
> Looks like my fix for the platform macros generation broke that part a bit.
> While with `BuildArch: x86_64_v3` it spits out an `x86_64_v3` RPM, it uses
> the `x86_64` optflags still. The only way to end up with `x86_64_vX` optflags
> is by using `--target x86_64_vX`. What's the best way to end up with better
> semantics?
The reason for that is that `BuildArch` only sets `%_target_cpu`, but not
anything else like `%_target` or `%optflags`:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/blob/e2c504c08381519c81774791fe6b82eb064a072e/build/parseSpec.c#L1012-L1025
IMO this can be treated as a separate bug (or is this intentional?). Opinions?
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2315#issuecomment-1352898530
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID: <rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2315/c1352898...@github.com>
_______________________________________________
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
