nx requires and provides

[Jason L Tibbitts III]

>>>>> "MS" == Michael Schwendt <bugs.michael at gmx.net> writes:

MS> When you know that nx is not available on one platform, you cannot
MS> (should not!) make freenx noarch and let it depend on a
MS> non-available nx.

I don't think it reasonable, though, to prevent a package from being
noarch just because somewhere in its dependency tree is a package
which is not available on every architecture.  It would be better to
somehow inform the buildsystem or the sign&push script that the noarch
package shouldn't go out to all of the architectures.  (Assuming it
can't just figure that out on its own.)

Even better, of course, would be to fix nx.  We're nearly fifteen
years into the era of common 64-bit computing!  One wonders how you
can expect upstream to get something important like security correct
when they've ignored something fundamental like 64-bitness.

 - J<