As per above, I don't think this is really an rpm issue, closing.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
Closed #865.
--
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/issues/865#event-2713400149___
Rpm-maint mailing list
I think this is a compose problem, not rpm problem: it'd be wrong for rpm to
encode some arch-specific knowledge into that noarch package, when that
arch-limitation could go away at any time (by that extra package becoming
available on that arch). Another line of thought is what dnf did
>From https://pagure.io/releng/issue/7553
```
Please first read trough https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/691
We have been approached by this question:
I have an noarch package foo
it has (implicitly noarch) subpackage foo-extra, it has a runtime dependency on
extra package (that is
