Thanks to an execfile() in jhbuildrc, allow managing packages to be
skipped on this or that architecture to be listed in an external file.
Signed-off-by: Cyril Brulebois
---
arch.skip | 24
jhbuildrc |8 +++-
2 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
c
> +# There might be better ways to detect the architecture. Patches welcome.
The only thing I can think of would be the platform library.
http://docs.python.org/library/platform.html. platform.machine is
probably the way to do it. I'd bet it uses something like uname behind
the scenes.
But I'm oka
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 05:43:46PM +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Thanks to an execfile() in jhbuildrc, allow managing packages to be
> skipped on this or that architecture to be listed in an external file.
>
> Signed-off-by: Cyril Brulebois
> ---
> arch.skip | 24
>
Hi again,
Dan Nicholson (06/03/2011):
> Now that I've spent some more time with jhbuild, I have some
> comments that I'd like to get your feedback on. Sorry this is so
> long after the 3(!) previous reviews.
unfortunately, I might need some time to look into it, I'm not sure I
want to update my
On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 8:29 AM, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Hi again,
>
> Dan Nicholson (06/03/2011):
>> Now that I've spent some more time with jhbuild, I have some
>> comments that I'd like to get your feedback on. Sorry this is so
>> long after the 3(!) previous reviews.
>
> unfortunately, I migh
Reviving this thread...
I like this idea, but I think we need the logic to be the other way around. We
need to have a mechanism to say that a given module only works on a set of
architectures, and skip it if the build arch isn't in that set.
ie (forgive my python as it's not my native tongue,
On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 7:52 PM, Jeremy Huddleston wrote:
> Reviving this thread...
>
> I like this idea, but I think we need the logic to be the other way around.
> We need to have a mechanism to say that a given module only works on a set of
> architectures, and skip it if the build arch isn'
On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 10:38:44PM -0700, Dan Nicholson wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 7:52 PM, Jeremy Huddleston wrote:
> > Reviving this thread...
> >
> > I like this idea, but I think we need the logic to be the other way around.
> > We need to have a mechanism to say that a given module on
On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 12:04 AM, Dirk Wallenstein wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 10:38:44PM -0700, Dan Nicholson wrote:
>> On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 7:52 PM, Jeremy Huddleston
>> wrote:
>> > Reviving this thread...
>> >
>> > I like this idea, but I think we need the logic to be the other way
>
