rawhide report: 20091104 changes - excluding noarch packages

[Jerry James]

On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 11:50 AM, Jesse Keating <jkeating at redhat.com> wrote:
> Until we add a new arch.  But that still leaves things like java, mono,
> ruby, etc as problem areas where "noarch" may not actually be "noarch".

We seem to be using "noarch" in two different senses:

1. Contains no machine code, other architecture-specific bits, or
build-system-specific artifacts (like build timestamps, build machine
names, etc.)

2. Can be built/installed/consumed on any architecture.

Those aren't the same.  Since the addition of a new arch can break #2,
how can packagers mean anything other than #1 by "noarch"?
-- 
Jerry James
http://www.jamezone.org/