python noarch vs arch

Sander Hoentjen sander at hoentjen.eu
Sat Sep 2 16:31:26 UTC 2006


On Sat, 2006-09-02 at 17:29 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 02, 2006 at 05:15:05PM +0200, Sander Hoentjen wrote:
> > On Sat, 2006-09-02 at 17:01 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote:
> > > On Sat, Sep 02, 2006 at 04:34:49PM +0200, Sander Hoentjen wrote:
> > > > I am working on packaging cohoba, this is a python gui client/mission
> > > > control for telepathy. It has one small .c file, so I have a few
> > > > questions:
> > > > - because of the .c file the package has to by arch-specific i guess. Is
> > > > there a strong preference to package as noarch?
> > > 
> > > No, on the contrary packaging binary bits as noarch is wrong.
> > 
> > yes i understand that, that's why i asked if there was a strong
> > preference for noarch, in which case the c part will be removed.
> 
> You shouldn't make the contents of your packages depend on the arch
> tag, it's the other way around. :)
> 
> If you are talking about a package of significant size (like
> openoffice ;) and you could easily replace (or drop w/o loss of
> functionality) the arch-dependent parts to make it noarch and thus
> save some significant space, then you could think about it.
> 
> But it's a packager's (your) choice, noone can give you metrics on
> size and functionality to weigh against. If in doubt prefer
> functionality over space savings.

Ok, I was just wondering if there might be some big advantages having a
package noarch. I guess now that the advantages are not big enough to
spend time on. Thank you and Jesse for answering, and sorry for the
confusion followed after my question.

Sander




More information about the fedora-extras-list mailing list